On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 11:06:27PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Probably right. I figured it would be useful to see what the outcome is
> with primary_conninfo, so they can be treated similarly.
The interactions with waiting for WAL to be available and the WAL
receiver stresses me a bit for restore_command, as you could finish
with the startup process switching to use restore_command with a WAL
receiver still working behind and overwriting partially the recovered
segment, which could lead to corruption. We should be *very* careful
about that.
--
Michael
