Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gxJJO-0002v3-4M for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:28:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gxJJM-0002ub-LH for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:28:52 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gxJJM-0002uR-6P for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:28:52 +0000 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gxJJJ-0007gP-CI for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:28:50 +0000 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B9322079; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:28:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:28:48 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anarazel.de; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=InQUQbqK7ELFiYyWSCTYxxP1bXY i1z2bAfNJr10px+U=; b=RBQXBupgpB6bB4/n6BbTCWLs1zJvw7KYpb/TBIjLniy 8HlMcMj0fFNXa9SopcjNE1/h0OEpJAqZDkgL9W0pvL5y4+CauBu3c7uHxgTB9jVS K+RsksxB8Xo+CBOCdDVozz/JG15MJIRsmQ9u/tw0BiuOht1l9LxW91X4p8I4MXv0 I2FwzQxhYLrqR2ZS2GHkqZxQTsQAh6Z7FG7QA+YaEXy0OoSAv9r8+n5VFByNklyS 0Zc3YPRZ+27rj3WppqrvLry9aqosvjd7OxuHVKrdQwQZd33K2ncBzk6Uh+Z+5ul3 iwEfGHGsBNX08PUBT3Nice1iILZt9py40Vgactct+4g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=InQUQb qK7ELFiYyWSCTYxxP1bXYi1z2bAfNJr10px+U=; b=f34tXbM+GrMFvnWCeBYEqi FPiEMuxrf0Hcs5lSogICb/nPN8WbDpnrOLFhcKe4ovMQ+PTVwo2nC0e2M1VlMW72 1Z/o54uY+kBkmVS2+NKjf3k84PX27/lvJ6Dfn+PtDYGKNigRqrPSBbp3pjjhvQAP 2SQikxX2N1I97tYokDIbjxPqVBDaGH+aFTOHxXwvADmL3B80GeVRwX6qyd8VHgIx 4O3wMP6RttGz8X/G2LjFUvyK+cj/4ajbtuhHQBERrItcJneiEQ4tCUomQQcm7Wzw dVuIKqJfCisl1EJPB98WoKUU9fJO4Zl92TQXsNlGccTOVDv6swEAWh3Xm+D0QfjA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddruddtgdduieefucdltddurdegtdelrddttd dmucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhht necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomheptehnughr vghsucfhrhgvuhhnugcuoegrnhgurhgvshesrghnrghrrgiivghlrdguvgeqnecukfhppe elkedrvddutddrudegtddrudejudenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghnughr vghssegrnhgrrhgriigvlhdruggvnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from intern.anarazel.de (c-98-210-140-171.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.210.140.171]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AF15AE4309; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:28:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 14:28:46 -0800 From: Andres Freund To: Thomas Munro Cc: John Klann , Stephen Frost , PostgreSQL mailing lists Subject: Re: BUG #15636: PostgreSQL 11.1 pg_basebackup backup to a CIFS destination throws fsync error at end of backup Message-ID: <20190222222846.fgxnu754kuvcwxia@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <15636-d380890dafd78fc6@postgresql.org> <20190218162638.GH6197@tamriel.snowman.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Hi, On 2019-02-23 11:20:02 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > So, for this patch tolerating EINVAL for fsync of directories (but not > files), enabling eg pg_backbackup on CIFS on eg Linux 3.10 to work, > tested by John, we have: > > Stephen: +1 > Michael: -0.1 > Thomas: -0.1 > > Any other opinions? > > Just in case you think it's strange that I'm voting against my own > patch: I'd probably be for it if I hadn't discovered that they've > fixed this in Linux 3.16 and later so that it succeeds. It's > apparently not in the default RHEL 6 and 7 kernels, though, and the > latter could be around for a while. I'm not entirely sure what amount > of work we should be doing to tolerate problems that are fixed in a > newer versions. One argument is that a 3.10 user who cares about this > should petition RH to back-port the fix into that kernel. (The nearby > WSL thread has some things in common but is a more clear cut case IMV > because there is no fix available on the WSL side.) Hm, given the fact that EINVAL doesn't appear to be triggerable by data level issues, I don't see much reason not to allow it. I mean it's really stupid that cifs ever returns it, but there's going to be a lot of users running things on older kernel for the forseeable future. Greetings, Andres Freund