Hi,
On Mon, 21 Sept 2026 at 14:05, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
> > On 18 Sep 2026, at 15:47, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > My idea was that since the WAL needed by the tests has already been
> > flushed, I thought that would be enough for the tests. Also, is using
> > ->lsn('write') considered better for these cases or do you recommend
> > it because of the simplicity?
>
> I prefer when tests have the least amount of special needs setup outside of the
> code under test. This isn't really making assumptions which make the test
> synthetic though.
That makes sense.
> Another option for going with your patch is to use wait_for_replay_catchup
> which should accomplish the same.
Nice, I updated them with wait_for_replay_catchup().
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
