On Tue, Mar 03, 2026 at 04:02:53AM +0000, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> I had a concern that some BF animals have not enable the injection point yet
> thus coverage might be decreased for them. But it's OK for me to fix
> it.
Requiring injection points to be enabled so as we have a strict
control over the standby snapshot records does not strike me as a bad
requirement in itself. Most of the animals use the switch these days.
It's a bit sad if this is not entirely stable in pre-v16 branches, but
a stable post-v17 behavior would always be better than an unstable
behavior everywhere.
> I preferred to add descriptions at the place checking enable_injection_points.
> See the updated version.
+ autovacuum = off
+ checkpoint_timeout = 1h
Why do we need these? An explanation seems in order in the shape of a
commit, or these should be removed.
Is there a different trick than the one posted at [1] to check the
stability of the proposal? I am wondering if I am missing something,
or if that's all. Alexander?
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/e1cf52d2-c344-4dfd-a918-e5f20ff04fa2@gmail.com
--
Michael
