On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:14, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 17:27, =A0<anjali_524@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>>> PST ERROR: =A0could not fsync file "base/16409": Invalid argument Dec 30
>>> 03:00:26 devok64-8 postgres_cifs_kaz_1[15812]: [2-2] [local] 15812
>>> 2011-12-30 03:00:26.511 PST STATEMENT: =A0CREATE DATABASE "KazDB
>
> The specific error seems to be coming from copydir.c's attempt to fsync
> a directory. =A0We are already ignoring EBADF there, and could presumably
> fix at least this symptom if we ignored EINVAL.
Sure, we could - and I guess if you're running over CIFS, reliability
might not be the biggest concern in the first place...
>> PostgreSQL does not support data directory over CIFS.
>
> I'm wondering what's your basis for asserting we don't support CIFS in
> general? =A0It's probably not terribly bulletproof, but any worse than NF=
S?
Yes, it is a lot worse than NFS from experience. I can't find a
reference to it anywhere now, but IIRC there are bigger issues - with
blocksizes, with syncing not properly, with write ordering.
--=20
=A0Magnus Hagander
=A0Me: http://www.hagander.net/
=A0Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
