Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Thinking about it some more ... what we actually need to prevent, AFAICS, >> is standby_mode becoming true in a standalone backend.
> I have spent some time playing with that and you are right. Only > standby_mode = on is able trigger a failure here, and the first one is > in WaitForWALToBecomeAvailable(). I'd just put the check at the end of > readRecoveryCommandFile(), this will avoid extra thinking should > readRecoveryCommandFile() be moved around. That's unlikely to happen > but it is a cheap insurance. Pushed with minor adjustments --- I moved the check to be closer to existing sanity checks in readRecoveryCommandFile, tweaked the wording (the man page for postgres refers to --single as "single-user server" mode) and added an errcode. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers