Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-06-26 12:32:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... But I wonder whether it's intentional that the old
>> walreceiver dies in the first place. That FATAL exit looks suspiciously
>> like it wasn't originally-designed-in behavior.
> It's quite intentional afaik - I've complained about the bad error
> message recently (we really shouldn't say "no COPY in progress), but
> exiting seems quite reasonable. Otherwise we'd have add a separate
> retry logic into the walsender, that reconnects without a new walsender
> being started.
Ah, I see. I'd misinterpreted the purpose of the infinite loop in
WalReceiverMain() --- now I see that's for receiving requests from the
startup proc for different parts of the WAL stream, not for reconnecting
to the master.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
