...
}
return(bytesRead);
d) say if you mount 'soft' and lose data, tough luck for you
I seem to recall from my days at Sun, you should NOT use soft
mount for NFS writes at all. Soft mounts are for non-critical
disk resources. (Solaris admin manual?)
--
Doug Royer
.
Refuse new connections - until it is back up.
Refuse or hang new queries - until it is back up.
Retry?
What should be done?
--
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
---|-
We Do Standards - You Need Standards
EINTR with hard+intr mounts.
I am not sure what you get with soft mounts on a timeout.
Doug McNaught wrote:
Doug Royer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The 'intr' option to NFS is not the same as EINTR. It
it means 'if the server does not respond for a while,
then return an EINTR', just like any
, meaning we want NFS to be as non-failure mode as
possible. Making PostgreSQL work on NFS system itself is risky, and
allowing it to work on systems that will soft-failure on writes seems
even worse.
--
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
in
other words, just about any function can signal just about any error including
errors that are proprietary additions any time. Good luck :)
--
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
---|-
We Do
into large IT infrastructures such as those found in healthcare institutions, clinics and physician practices.
.
--
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
---|-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Office: (208)612-INET
/catch system.
No, try/catch does not trap division by zero unless the underlying
implementation throws an error there is nothing to catch.
On Unix's trap for signal SIGFPE - standard POSIX.
--
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Doug Royer wrote:
No, try/catch does not trap division by zero unless the underlying
implementation throws an error there is nothing to catch.
I am absolutely 100% sure that you can catch int/0 with a try catch
handler (in c++) on windows platforms (when compiled with ms
