Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On February 15, 2019 9:13:10 AM PST, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't be panicking for sync_file_range
>> failure, period.
> With some flags it's strictly required, it does"eat"errors depending on the flags. So I'm not sure I understand?
Really? The specification says that it starts I/O, not that it waits
around for any to finish.
The bigger picture here is that this set of patches seems to have moved
us too far in the direction of defending against hypothetical kernel
bugs, and too far away from real-world usability. I am not happy with
the tradeoff.
regards, tom lane
