On 4/8/26 11:08 AM, Chao Li wrote:
> While working on another patch, I happened to notice that WalRcvWaitForStartPosition() calls raw exit(1). I think this should use proc_exit(1) instead, so that the normal cleanup machinery is not bypassed.
>
> This tiny patch just replaces exit(1) with proc_exit(1) in WalRcvWaitForStartPosition().
This looks likely to be correct since when we exit in WalReceiverMain()
(on WALRCV_STOPPING and WALRCV_STOPPED) we call proc_exit(1). I feel we
should exit the same way in WalRcvWaitForStartPosition() as we do in
WalReceiverMain() and if not I would like a comment explaining why those
two cases are different.
Andreas