On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 04:56:45PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> - I think there needs to be a reference to the problem, otherwise we'll
> just redo this a couple years down the line
> - I'd not add the XXX, because the whole idea of durable_rename_excl
> seems wrong to me, and it might motivate people to come up with
> patches...
Fine by me to remove that :)
What about replacing the XXX comment by a small note, say:
"On Windows, using a hard link followed by an unlink() causes
concurrency issues with code paths interacting with those files, a
rename does not cause that."
If you have a better idea, which I am sure you do, please feel free to
send suggestions.
--
Michael
