How about if it is just a flat file with same name as tablespace link, why we want to give error for that case? I think now it just don't do anything with that file (unlink will fail with ENOENT and it will be ignored, atleast thats the way currently it behaves in Windows) and create a separate symlink with same name which seems okay to me and in the change proposed by you it will give error, do you see any reason for doing so?
This is surely wrong. unlink won't fail with ENOENT if the file is present; ENOENT means that the file is NOT present. It will succeed if the file is present, which is exactly what I'm saying is wrong.
I have to retry that operation, but for me unlink hasn't deleted
the file on Windows, may be I am not doing properly, but in
anycase why we want to throw error for such a case, why
can't we just ignore and create a symlink with the same name.
I realize our existing code just more or less assumes that that it's a symlink. I think we've probably been a bit careless there.
I agree with you that deleting unrelated file with the same name as
symlink is not the right thing to do, but not sure throwing error for
