On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 04:13:53PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > I'm not certain if message_deferred is a property of the error > struct. Callers don't seem to need that information.
True enough, will remove. > The name "XLOG_RADER_NONE" seems too generic. XLOG_READER_NOERROR will > be clearer. Or perhaps just XLOG_READER_NO_ERROR? > 0002 shifts the behavior for the OOM case from ending recovery to > retrying at the same record. If the last record is really corrupted, > the server won't be able to finish recovery. I doubt we are good with > this behavior change. You mean on an incorrect xl_tot_len? Yes that could be possible. Another possibility would be a retry logic with an hardcoded number of attempts and a delay between each. Once the infrastructure is in place, this still deserves more discussions but we can be flexible. The immediate FATAL is choice. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
