Re: [HACKERS] Another reason why the recovery tests take a long time

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-06-26 12:32:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... But I wonder whether it's intentional that the old
>> walreceiver dies in the first place.  That FATAL exit looks suspiciously
>> like it wasn't originally-designed-in behavior.

> It's quite intentional afaik - I've complained about the bad error
> message recently (we really shouldn't say "no COPY in progress), but
> exiting seems quite reasonable.  Otherwise we'd have add a separate
> retry logic into the walsender, that reconnects without a new walsender
> being started.

Ah, I see.  I'd misinterpreted the purpose of the infinite loop in
WalReceiverMain() --- now I see that's for receiving requests from the
startup proc for different parts of the WAL stream, not for reconnecting
to the master.
        regards, tom lane