On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Hm, StartupXLOG seems like a pretty random place to check that, especially
>>> since doing it there requires an extra stat() call. Why didn't you just
>>> make readRecoveryCommandFile() error out?
>
>> Well, the idea is to do the check before doing anything on PGDATA and
>> leave it intact, particularly the post-crash fsync().
>
> I don't see anything very exciting between the beginning of StartupXLOG
> and readRecoveryCommandFile. In particular, doing the fsync seems like
> a perfectly harmless and maybe-good thing. If there were some operation
> with potentially bad side-effects in that range, it would be dangerous
> anyway because of the risk of readRecoveryCommandFile erroring out due
> to invalid contents of recovery.conf.
Does the attached suit better then?
--
Michael