Re: Fix archive restore race that could unlink WAL before rename

On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 04:07:02PM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
>
> > On 5 Aug 2026, at 15:12, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >
> > there is no point in including the test at all
>
> There's no point in committing the test. There is a point in writing
> test to demonstrate and describe bug with the test. That's why I
> recommend writing test in a separate patch.

As my previous words may be a bit confusing. Proving a bug in the
shape of a test is super useful, even if the so-said test finishes by
not being committed.

>> One thing that may be worth adding is a mention that we care about
>> concurrent WAL senders
>
> +1.

I'll do that, and likely apply the result. Another part is if this
should be backpatched or not, but I always find these recovery changes
quite stressing to do in stable branches, so for now I'd tend to just
do this change on HEAD, also due to the fact that we don't seem to
have reports about this tiny window being a problem in practice.
--
Michael