Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questions
Date
Msg-id 200209200405.g8K45RV12655@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questions  (Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Mike Mascari wrote:
> I read the article and did not come away with that conclusion. 
> The article describes using the MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT 
> flag, which was created for the express purpose of allowing a 
> SETUP.EXE to remove itself, or rather tell Windows to remove it 
> on the next reboot. Also, if you want the Win32 port to run in 
> 95/98/ME, you can't rely on MoveFileEx(), you have to use 
> MoveFile().
> 
> I will do some testing with concurrency and let you know. But 
> don't get your hopes up. This is one of the many advantages that 
> TABLESPACEs have when more than one relation is stored in a 
> single DATAFILE. There was Oracle for MS-DOS, after all..

I was focusing on handling of pg_pwd and other config file that are
written by various backend while other backends are reading them.  The
actual data files should be OK because we have an exclusive lock when we
are adding/removing them.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mike Mascari
Date:
Subject: Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questions
Next
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres 7.2.2 Segment Error