At Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:29:12 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote in > After reading this, I came up with a possibility that walreceiver > recovers more quickly than the calling interval to > WaitForWALtoBecomeAvailable(). If walreceiver disconnects after a call > to the function WaitForWAL...(), and then somehow recovers the > connection before the next call, the function doesn't notice the > disconnection and returns XLREAD_SUCCESS wrongly. If this assumption > is correct, the correct fix might be for us to return XLREAD_FAIL when > reconnection happens after the last call to the WaitForWAL...() > function.
That's my stupid. The function performs reconnection by itself. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
