| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Reini Urban" <rurban(at)x-ray(dot)at> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: APR 1.0 released |
| Date: | 2004-09-10 11:04:35 |
| Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D197@m0114.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Personally I don't think that any rename()-usleep loop is necessary.
> > I'll check the archives.
>
> I agree the rename loop seems unnecessary. I kept it in case we hadn't
> dealt with all the failure places. Should we remove them now or wait
> for 8.1? Seems we should keep them in and see if we get reports from
> users of looping forever, and if not we can remove them in 8.1.
What I do not understand is, that Windows has rename and _unlink.
Are we using those or not?
Looping forever is certainly not good, but I thought the current code
had a limited loop. I think a limited loop is required, since both
rename and _unlink can not cope with a locked file.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-09-10 11:58:56 | Re: APR 1.0 released |
| Previous Message | Reini Urban | 2004-09-10 10:36:06 | Re: APR 1.0 released |