On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:12:29PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: > I also believe that client shouldn't be coded to a broken server. But > in some of those cases, the client is not spec compliant, how is that > a server bug? The case of SERVERFAULT of RESTOREFH I'm not sure what > to make of it. I think it's more of a spec failure to address. It > seems that server isn't allowed to fail after executing a > non-idempotent operation but that's a hard requirement. I still think > that client's best set of action is to ignore errors on RESTOREFH. Maybe. But how is a server hitting SERVERFAULT on RESTOREFH, anyway? That's pretty weird. --b.
