On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 at 21:16, Euler Taveira <eu...@eulerto.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2024, at 10:31 AM, vignesh C wrote: > > I was able to reproduce this random failure and found the following reason: > The Minimum recovery ending location 0/5000000 was more than the > recovery_target_lsn specified is "0/4001198". In few random cases the > standby applies a few more WAL records after the replication slot is > created; this leads to minimum recovery ending location being greater > than the recovery_target_lsn because of which the server will fail > with: > FATAL: requested recovery stop point is before consistent recovery point > > > Thanks for checking. I proposed an alternative patch for it [1]. Can you check > it?
This approach looks good to me. Regards, Vignesh
