Re: pg_receivewal - couple of improvements

On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 10:01:42PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I don't get it. If you're missing WAL it means that will you have to do that
> tedious manual work to retrieve them no matter what. So on top of that tedious
> work, you also have to make sure that you don't provide a bogus start position.

I may be wrong in saying that, but the primary use case I have seen
for pg_receivewal is a service integration for archiving.

> Maybe that's a good idea but I'm still having a hard time imagining a scenario
> where it would actually be a good idea.

With the defaults that we have now in place (current LSN location,
current slot's location or the archive location), I am not really
convinced that we need more control in this area with the proposed
option.
--
Michael