RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Monday, February 19, 2024 11:39 AM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 7:40 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, February 16, 2024 6:41 PM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch. Here are few comments:
> 
> Thanks for the comments.
> 
> >
> > 2.
> >
> > +static bool
> > +validate_remote_info(WalReceiverConn *wrconn, int elevel)
> > ...
> > +
> > +       return (!remote_in_recovery && primary_slot_valid);
> >
> > The primary_slot_valid could be uninitialized in this function.
> 
> return (!remote_in_recovery && primary_slot_valid);
> 
> Here if remote_in_recovery is true, it will not even read primary_slot_valid. It
> will read primary_slot_valid only if remote_in_recovery is false and in such a
> case primary_slot_valid will always be initialized in the else block above, let me
> know if you still feel we shall initialize this to some default?

I understand that it will not be used, but some complier could report WARNING
for the un-initialized variable. The cfbot[1] seems complain about this as well.

[1] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5416851522453504

Best Regards,
Hou zj