On Sat, Nov 9, 2024 at 11:20 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 9, 2024 at 9:30 AM Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > > My impression was that this was something we just didn't get around to. > I wouldn't have pushed these so close to release if this hadn't been code > already tested for a long time in release 16+. Maybe we missed something, > but I doubt it. > > c5cb8f3b did have a couple more follow-ups: 4517358e and f71007fb. > These fixed initdb when run under a junction point: > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4590c37927d7b8ee84f9855d83229018%40postgrespro.ru Oh, ouch. I guess it's too late to add those for this release. Still, an initdb failure is not as bad as a pg_rewind failure, IMNSHO. cheers andrew
