| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgbackrest(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: recovery.signal not cleaned up when both signal files are present |
| Date: | 2026-02-13 13:27:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwH+2=VBsybF84TJLz3fyyKLkuXQD4=icwgd1Gb-a6O-Fw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 3:18 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 03:05:45PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Yeah, so I've added the test as suggested. The updated patch is attached.
>
>
> What's the point in having the check for the files in data_dir? The
> second one for standby2 should be enough as this is to test only
> readRecoverySignalFile().
I added that test to verify that both files are removed even in the normal
standby case (i.e., when only standby.signal is present). However, if testing
only the case where both signal files are present is sufficient, I'm fine with
removing the data_dir check. Attached is an updated patch that checks only
the latter case for standby2.
I will commit this patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-Remove-recovery.signal-at-recovery-end-when-both-.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Viktor Holmberg | 2026-02-13 14:16:06 | Re: Allow ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE to return EXCLUDED values |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-02-13 13:18:24 | Re: Add a greedy join search algorithm to handle large join problems |