On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 10:01:04AM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: > I think that would make sense to have more flexibility in the worker_spi > module. I think that could be done in a dedicated patch though. I > think it makes more sense to have the current patch "focusing" on > this new flag (while adding a test about it without too much > refactoring). What about doing the worker_spi module re-factoring > as a follow up of this one?
I would do that first, as that's what I usually do, but I see also your point that this is not mandatory. If you want, I could give it a shot tomorrow to see where it leads. > Oh right, worth to modify 019_replslot_limit.pl, 002_corrupted.pl and > 001_pg_controldata.pl in a separate patch for consistency? (they are using > "(stat $node->logfile)[7]" or "(stat($pg_control))[7]"). Indeed, that's strange. Let's remove the dependency to stat here. The other solution is slightly more elegant IMO, as we don't rely on the position of the result from stat(). -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
