On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
> > On 06/08/2015 12:08 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > >> How about if it is just a flat file with same name as tablespace link, >> why we want to give error for that case? I think now it just don't do >> anything with that file (unlink will fail with ENOENT and it will be >> ignored, atleast thats the way currently it behaves in Windows) and >> create a separate symlink with same name which seems okay to >> me and in the change proposed by you it will give error, do you see >> any reason for doing so? >> >> >> > > This is surely wrong. unlink won't fail with ENOENT if the file is > present; ENOENT means that the file is NOT present. It will succeed if the > file is present, which is exactly what I'm saying is wrong. > I have to retry that operation, but for me unlink hasn't deleted the file on Windows, may be I am not doing properly, but in anycase why we want to throw error for such a case, why can't we just ignore and create a symlink with the same name. > I realize our existing code just more or less assumes that that it's a > symlink. I think we've probably been a bit careless there. > I agree with you that deleting unrelated file with the same name as symlink is not the right thing to do, but not sure throwing error for such a case is better either. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
