On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 3:30 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:47 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Is it possible that unlink() on APFS is not atomic? > > > I think you might be right. > > https://github.com/macdice/unlinktest > > Bleah. But you can do better than ask whether it's a bug: you can > quote POSIX: > > The unlink() function shall remove a link to a file. If path names a > symbolic link, unlink() shall remove the symbolic link named by path > and shall not affect any file or directory named by the contents of > the symbolic link. Otherwise, unlink() shall remove the link named by > the pathname pointed to by path and shall decrement the link count of > the file referenced by the link. > > When the file's link count becomes 0 and no process has the file open, > the space occupied by the file shall be freed and the file shall no > longer be accessible. If one or more processes have the file open when > the last link is removed, the link shall be removed before unlink() > returns, but the removal of the file contents shall be postponed until > all references to the file are closed. > > Not a lot of wiggle room there.
Agreed. Secret non-shareable bug report filed. Fingers crossed. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
