Re: sync_standbys_defined read/write race on startup

On 10.04.2025 12:15, Michael Paquier wrote:

> Hmm, yeah.  Instead of last, it would be better to put it in second
> place perhaps, for clarity?  That would be the same at the end, but we
> would be slightly more consistent with the past logic regarding the
> ordering.  Does that look OK to you?

Yes, from my point of view it looks fine.


Best regards,
Maksim Melnikov