Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]> writes:
> On 3 Sep 2026, at 19:10, Jacob Champion <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> The inciting event is that an extension drops a file called
>> pgactive.stat into global/. We could say "don't do that", in which
>> case I think we should follow Robert's idea in [1] and complain about
>> the existence of the file itself rather than the lack of checksummable
>> material. Or we could say "that's fine" and adjust pg_checksums to
>> continue onwards if the filename isn't what we expect.
> I'm not sure I have a strong preference, keeping it in sync with pg_basebackup
> seems like a pretty good strategy to make it easier for users.
It looks to me like there was a fair amount of consensus behind
025584a16, so I think we should conclude that pg_basebackup's new
behavior (ignore stray files) is the right thing and it was an
oversight that pg_checksums wasn't adjusted similarly.
regards, tom lane
