Horton

Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Michael Brown <michael.brown@discourse.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2023-08-22T03:53:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 07:06:32PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> This would look something like the attached patch.  I think this is nicer.
> With this patch, we don't have to choose between including fd.h or
> redefining the macros in the frontend code.

Yes, this one is moving the needle in the good direction.  +1.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Adjust documentation for syncfs().

  2. Improve the naming in wal_sync_method code.

  3. Allow using syncfs() in frontend utilities.

  4. Add support for syncfs() in frontend support functions.

  5. Make enum for sync methods available to frontend code.

  6. Move PG_TEMP_FILE* macros to file_utils.h.

  7. Change client-side fsync_fname() to report errors fatally