Re: Dubious code in pg_rewind's process_target_file()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Dubious code in pg_rewind's process_target_file()
Date: 2020-09-05 18:18:29
Message-ID: 1222282.1599329909@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> It looks to me like we could replace "exists = false" with "return",
> rather than uselessly constructing a FILE_ACTION_REMOVE entry for
> a file we've already proven is not there.

Or actually, maybe we should just drop the lstat call altogether?
AFAICS it's 99.99% redundant with the lstat that traverse_datadir
has done nanoseconds before. Yeah, maybe somebody managed to drop
the file in between, but the FILE_ACTION_REMOVE code would have to
deal with such cases anyway in case a drop occurs later.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranier Vilela 2020-09-05 18:58:51 Re: A micro-optimisation for walkdir()
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-09-05 18:08:40 Dubious code in pg_rewind's process_target_file()