On 3/6/18 9:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 5:04 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net
> <mailto:da...@pgmasters.net>> wrote:
> On 1/20/18 10:13 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Unlinking it first seems dangerous, as pointed out by Andres.
> > What about first trying ReplaceFile() and then if it fails with "target
> > doesn't exist", then call MoveFileEx().
> > Or the other way around -- try MoveFileEx() first since that seems to
> > work most of the time today (if it mostly broke we'd be in trouble
> > already), and if it fails with a sharing violation, try ReplaceFile()?
> > And perhaps end up doing it something similar to what we do with shared
> > memory which is just to loop over it and try each a couple of time,
> > before giving up and failing?
> This patch was mistakenly left as Needs Review during the last
> commitfest but it's pretty clear that a new patch is required.
> OK! No objections against marking this patch RWF.
Hmmm, I just noticed this categorized as a bug. I thought it was a
Even so, it looks like the approach needs a rethink so better to wait
Marked Returned with Feedback.