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



Reply via email to