Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?
Date
Msg-id 20230830011408.GA2269049@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 09:10:47AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I understand that I'm perhaps sounding pedantic about fsync_pgdata()..
> But, after thinking more about it, I would still make this code fail
> hard with an exit(EXIT_FAILURE) to let any C code calling directly
> this routine with sync_method = DATA_DIR_SYNC_METHOD_SYNCFS know that
> the build does not allow the use of this option when we don't have
> HAVE_SYNCFS.  parse_sync_method() offers some protection, but adding
> this restriction also in the execution path is more friendly than
> falling back silently to the default of flushing each file if
> fsync_pgdata() is called with syncfs but the build does not support
> it.  At least that's more predictible.

That seems fair enough.  I did this in v7.  I restructured fsync_pgdata()
and fsync_dir_recurse() so that any new sync methods should cause compiler
warnings until they are implemented.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench: allow to exit immediately when any client is aborted
Next
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: A propose to revise \watch help message