Hi
On Monday, January 25, 2021 5:13 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at>
wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 15:30 +0100, I wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 13:09 +0000, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> >
> > > > My vote is that we should not have a GUC for such an unlikely
> > > > event, and that stopping recovery is good enough.
> > > OK. IIUC, my current patch for this fix doesn't need to be changed or
> withdrawn.
> > > Thank you for your explanation.
> >
> > Well, that's just my opinion.
> >
> > Fujii Masao seemed to disagree with the patch, and his voice carries weight.
>
> I think you should pst another patch where the second, now superfluous, error
> message is removed.
Updated. This patch showed no failure during regression tests
and has been aligned by pgindent.
Best Regards,
Takamichi Osumi
stronger_safeguard_for_archive_recovery_v04.patch
Description: stronger_safeguard_for_archive_recovery_v04.patch
