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 (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers