On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 5:41 PM Juan José Santamaría Flecha
<juanjo.santamaria@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 9:48 AM Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 at 13:10, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > See comment in pgunlink() "We need to loop because even though
>> > PostgreSQL uses flags that allow unlink while the file is open, other
>> > applications might have the file
>> > open without those flags.". Can you once see if there is any flag
>> > that you have missed to pass to allow this?
>>
>> > If there is nothing we
>> > can do about it, then we might need to use some different API or maybe
>> > define a new API that can handle this.
>>
>> There were objections against modifying the vfd api only for this
>> replication-related use-case. Having a new API will require all the
>> changes required to enable the virtual FDs feature that we need from
>> vfd. If nothing works out from the FILE_SHARE_DELETE thing, I am
>> thinking, we can use VFD, plus we can keep track of per-subtransaction
>> vfd handles, and do something similar to AtEOSubXact_Files().
>>
>
> The comment about "other applications might have the file open without those flags." is surely due to systems working
withan antivirus touching Postgres files.
>
> I was not able to reproduce the Permission denied error with current HEAD,
>
I am not sure what exactly you tried. Can you share the steps and
your environment details?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
