Re: pg_upgrade test failure - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Justin Pryzby
Subject Re: pg_upgrade test failure
Date
Msg-id 20221018043144.GF7745@telsasoft.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade test failure  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade test failure  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 01:06:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 09:47:37AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > * Server 2019, as used on CI, still uses the traditional NT semantics
> > (unlink is asynchronous, when all handles closes)
> > * the fix I proposed has the right effect (I will follow up with tests
> > to demonstrate)
> 
> Wow, nice investigation.  And cirrus does not offer a newer option
> either..

Currently Andres builds images based on cirrus's 2019 image, but I think
we could use any windows docker image.

> Do you think that Windows server 2022 (successor of 2019) is
> able to use POSIX semantics for unlink()?

I think it's possible to use it now, like what's done here.
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/40/3347/

The only caveat is that it's done conditionally.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply
Next
From: "osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure