> On Apr 8, 2018, at 16:16, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > We don't panic that way when getting IO > errors during reads either, and they're more likely to be persistent > than errors during writes (because remapping on storage layer can fix > issues, but not during reads).
There is a distinction to be drawn there, though, because we immediately pass an error back to the client on a read, but a write problem in this situation can be masked for an extended period of time. That being said... > There's a lot of not so great things here, but I don't think there's any > need to panic. No reason to panic, yes. We can assume that if this was a very big persistent problem, it would be much more widely reported. It would, however, be good to find a way to get the error surfaced back up to the client in a way that is not just monitoring the kernel logs. -- -- Christophe Pettus x...@thebuild.com
