At Wed, 19 Oct 2022 10:48:03 -0400, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote in > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:28 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Yeah, leaving a potentially unbounded number of files around after > > > > system crashes seems pretty unfriendly. I'm not sure how to fix that, > > > > exactly. > > > > Unbounded number of sequential crash-restarts itself is a more serious > > problem..
(Sorry, this was just a kidding.) > They don't have to be sequential. Garbage could accumulate over weeks, > months, or years. Sure. Users' archive cleanup facilities don't work if they only handles the files that with legit WAL file names. > Anyway, I agree we should hope that the system doesn't crash often, > but we cannot prevent the system administrator from removing the power > whenever they like. We can however try to reduce the number of > database-related things that go wrong if this happens, and I think we > should. Bharath's patch seems like it's probably a good idea, and if > we can do better, we should. Yeah, I don't deny this, rather agree. So, we should name temporary files so that they are identifiable as garbage unconditionally at the next startup. (They can be being actually active otherwise.) regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center