Re: recovery.signal not cleaned up when both signal files are present

On 2/10/26 11:52, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 12:26:36PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> +1 to apply this change only to the master branch. Patch attached.
> 
> It looks like something we should have a test for, at least..

+1 for a test.

> +    /*
> +     *
> +     * If both signal files are present, standby signal file takes precedence.
> +     * If neither is present then we won't enter archive recovery.
> +     */
> 
> This comment's format is incorrect.

Other than the comment the patch looks good overall.

Reluctantly I have to agree to not back patch this. I'm not sure how 
this change would break existing recovery processes but experience tells 
me that it probably would.

Instead -- I wonder if we could add a warning in the back branches?

Regards,
-David