* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > * Raphael Hertzog (hertzog(at)debian(dot)org) wrote:
> >> Still I believe that this issue should be fixed in both sides. It's not
> >> smart from PostgreSQL to call fsync() when it has not made any change.
>
> > Why?
>
> My thought about this is just to ignore EINVAL when fsync'ing a directory,
> as we already do with EBADF.
Yeah, I suppose we could, just not sure that an EINVAL should really be
getting returned here, imv.
Thanks!
Stephen