Hi > For one, it's not ok to just let the startup process think that the > walreceiver failed - that'll make it change source of WAL to the next > available method. Something we definitely do not want, as > restore_command is very commonly slower.
Ok. This was not mentioned before Michael response yesterday. restore_command is much faster compared to database restart, also switch to a different method was proposed few years ago by Simon Riggs in original change recovery.conf proposal ( https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CANP8+jLO5fmfudbB1b1iw3pTdOK1HBM=xmtarfoa5zpdvcq...@mail.gmail.com/ ). I assumed we can start with this. Sorry for your wasted time. > That'd still switch to a different method, something we do not want... Ok, do not want means we do not want. Will try change behavior. regards, Sergei
