On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 2:54 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 10:05:52AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:07 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> > <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Maybe the "best" approach would be to have a way to detect that a slot has been
> > > re-created on the primary (but that would mean rely on more than the slot name
> > > to "identify" a slot and probably add a new member to the struct to do so).
> > >
> >
> > Right, I also thought so but not sure further complicating the slot
> > machinery is worth detecting this case explicitly. If we see any
> > problem with the idea discussed then we may need to think something
> > along those lines.
>
> Yeah, let's see. On one side that would require extra work but on the other side
> that would also probably simplify (and less bug prone in the mid-long term?)
> other parts of the code.
>
After following Sawada-San's suggestion to not copy the 'failover'
option there doesn't seem to be much special handling, so there is
probably less to simplify.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
