On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 12:45 AM David Steele <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2/13/26 20:27, Fujii Masao wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 3:18 PM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 03:05:45PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >>> Yeah, so I've added the test as suggested. The updated patch is attached. > >> > >> > >> What's the point in having the check for the files in data_dir? The > >> second one for standby2 should be enough as this is to test only > >> readRecoverySignalFile(). > > > > I added that test to verify that both files are removed even in the normal > > standby case (i.e., when only standby.signal is present). However, if > > testing > > only the case where both signal files are present is sufficient, I'm fine > > with > > removing the data_dir check. Attached is an updated patch that checks only > > the latter case for standby2. > > > > I will commit this patch. > > I'm fine with the additional checks in v2. They are inexpensive and show > that the changes (probably) don't have side effects. > > But I don't feel strongly about it so either v2 or v3 is OK with me.
I've pushed the v3 patch. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii Masao
