On 12/6/18, 4:54 PM, "Michael Paquier" <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 02:43:35PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Why? A WARNING would be logged if the first unlink() fails, and >> another, different WARNING would be logged if the subsequent fsync >> fails. It looks enough to me to make a distinction between both. Now, >> you may have a point in the fact that we could also live with only using >> unlink() for this code path, as even on repetitive crashes this would >> take care of removing orphan archive status files consistently. > > After sleeping on that, using plain unlink() makes indeed the most > sense. Any objections if I move on with that, adding a proper comment > explaining the choice? I don't plan to finish wrapping this patch today > but Monday my time anyway.
That seems reasonable to me. Nathan
