Jeff Frost <jeff@frostconsultingllc.com> writes:
> That all seems reasonable enough. Is it in the docs somewhere? I
> didn't find anything like this mentioned. If not, could we get it
> added as a note?
Yeah, it hadn't occurred to anyone to specify this, because we just
thought of recovery_command as fetching from a static archive.
We clearly need to document the expected semantics better.
I'm wondering whether we should discourage people from putting
side-effects into the recovery_command, period. You already found out
that recovery can ask for the same file more than once, but what if it
never asks for a particular file at all? I'm not sure that can happen,
just playing devil's advocate.
Simon, did you see this thread? What do you think?
regards, tom lane
