Re: APR 1.0 released - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Subject Re: APR 1.0 released
Date
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D197@m0114.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to APR 1.0 released  (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>)
Responses Re: APR 1.0 released  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > Personally I don't think that any rename()-usleep loop is necessary.
> > I'll check the archives.
>
> I agree the rename loop seems unnecessary.  I kept it in case we hadn't
> dealt with all the failure places.  Should we remove them now or wait
> for 8.1?  Seems we should keep them in and see if we get reports from
> users of looping forever, and if not we can remove them in 8.1.

What I do not understand is, that Windows has rename and _unlink.
Are we using those or not?

Looping forever is certainly not good, but I thought the current code
had a limited loop. I think a limited loop is required, since both
rename and _unlink can not cope with a locked file.

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Reini Urban
Date:
Subject: Re: APR 1.0 released
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: APR 1.0 released