> On 28 Sep 2021, at 13:12, Dimitri Fontaine <Dimitri.Fontaine@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I think it’s safe to focus on Daniel’s entry in the commit fest,
For reference, here is the output from your testcase running with the
referenced patch:
$ ./bin/pg_basebackup -p 5432 -D /tmp/bb -X stream -S SlotDoesNotExists -P
pg_basebackup: error: could not send replication command "START_REPLICATION": ERROR: replication slot
"SlotDoesNotExists"does not exist
pg_basebackup: error: background WAL receiver terminated unexpectedly
pg_basebackup: removing data directory "/tmp/bb"
So this patch does seem to cover that case as well.
> and use this pgsql-bugs email as a reminder that it should very probably be backported as a bug-fix to all the
maintainedbranches.
It probably should, I can't see anyone relying on the current behavior. It's
however awfully intrusive for a backport as it effectively adds functionality
to solve what could be devils-advocate argued is an inconvenience and not a
bug. Our conservative stance on backports make this not a clear-cut case, but
I'm interested in what others think here.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
