Re: BUG #13888: pg_dump write error

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, kunschikov(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #13888: pg_dump write error
Date: 2016-01-27 11:33:26
Message-ID: 20160127113326.GA639380@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> > <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Yeah, I noticed this and similar lacks of error checks in pg_dump in
> >> code review, which I didn't get around to patching. Care to submit a
> >> patch?
>
> > Indeed, with a closer look there are things like tarWrite that can
> > return 0 and trigger WRITE_ERROR_EXIT with the same thing. Couldn't we
> > simply check for errno = 0 and generate a more generic error message
> > instead? Or are you willing at replacing all those things with just
> > exit_horribly()?
>
> I do not understand these claims that there isn't an error check there.
> There surely is. But fwrite() didn't set errno.

Yeah, that's what I was remembering actually:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150608174336.GM133018@postgresql.org

> The real question is why did he get a short write in the first place.
> We don't make any attempt to support filesystems that require retries,
> which seems to be what is going on here. Should we?

Sounds likely.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-01-27 12:26:22 Re: Re[2]: [BUGS] Segfault in MemoryContextAlloc
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2016-01-27 11:23:07 Re: Re[2]: [BUGS] Segfault in MemoryContextAlloc