At Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:29:12 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote in
> After reading this, I came up with a possibility that walreceiver
> recovers more quickly than the calling interval to
> WaitForWALtoBecomeAvailable(). If walreceiver disconnects after a call
> to the function WaitForWAL...(), and then somehow recovers the
> connection before the next call, the function doesn't notice the
> disconnection and returns XLREAD_SUCCESS wrongly. If this assumption
> is correct, the correct fix might be for us to return XLREAD_FAIL when
> reconnection happens after the last call to the WaitForWAL...()
> function.
That's my stupid. The function performs reconnection by itself.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center