From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes? |
Date: | 2022-09-26 21:27:04 |
Message-ID: | 20220926212704.GA1342110@nathanxps13 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 08:33:53PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Irrespective of what Windows does with file pointers in WriteFile(),
> should we add lseek(SEEK_SET) in our own pwrite()'s implementation,
> something like [5]? This is rather hackish without fully knowing what
> Windows does internally in WriteFile(), but this does fix inherent
> issues that our pwrite() callers (there are quite a number of places
> that use pwrite() and presumes file pointer doesn't change on Windows)
> may have on Windows. See the regression tests passing [6] with the fix
> [5].
I think so. I don't see why we would rather have each caller ensure
pwrite() behaves as documented.
> + /*
> + * On Windows, it is found that WriteFile() changes the file
> pointer and we
> + * want pwrite() to not change. Hence, we explicitly reset the
> file pointer
> + * to beginning of the file.
> + */
> + if (lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET) != 0)
> + {
> + _dosmaperr(GetLastError());
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> return result;
> }
Why reset to the beginning of the file? Shouldn't we reset it to what it
was before the call to pwrite()?
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2022-09-26 21:28:55 | Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes |
Previous Message | Nikita Malakhov | 2022-09-26 21:26:32 | Re: Pluggable toaster |