MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f14463ab-990b-4ae9-a177-998d2677aae0@pgbackrest.org>
 <CAHGQGwEnakTrosMp3Y=Trya4MTC-h8Lqx3FDU1mOALRQ0rz59Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <9e8b7ee9-4a16-477a-baa5-0cdf37a04798@pgbackrest.org>
 <CAHGQGwG44vZbSoBmg076G+xkR6n=Tj2=q+fVkfP7yEsyF1daFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c2e97e35-1227-4351-8faa-fa95208f6cf9@pgbackrest.org>
 <aakAmNjKyBWRU1vR@paquier.xyz>
 <e6a27751-8c91-4bff-ba07-2e97de99e34f@pgbackrest.org>
 <CAHGQGwEYYad_=fiBkt8HZ=aknXoCUx=2cL7UwSQSYM3nozHMyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <bc089939-a889-4fd4-bad8-42cc071cd58e@pgbackrest.org>
 <CAHGQGwGuyb--9MBJX__FVJH1=ny0Jh1H+j0Z-_z-28VZy9hK8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <8733e942-56fc-4542-9351-63f213f7e23c@pgbackrest.org>
In-Reply-To: <8733e942-56fc-4542-9351-63f213f7e23c@pgbackrest.org>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2026 00:04:00 +0900
Message-ID: 
 <CAHGQGwEhf9byyjhcDEMAd0kPkTdJsO0-HNTnX6Hqs6puBij3-g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Improve checks for GUC recovery_target_xid
To: David Steele <david@pgbackrest.org>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?H=C3=BCseyin_Demir?= <huseyin.d3r@gmail.com>,
	Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwEhf9byyjhcDEMAd0kPkTdJsO0-HNTnX6Hqs6puBij3-g%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 10:32=E2=80=AFPM David Steele <david@pgbackrest.org>=
 wrote:
>
> On 3/5/26 19:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 5:15=E2=80=AFPM David Steele <david@pgbackrest.o=
rg> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/5/26 12:03, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 1:21=E2=80=AFPM David Steele <david@pgbackrest=
.org> wrote:
> >>>> The prior standby is not running because of the invalid config. I
> >>>> figured it was better to start clean but when I update the
> >>>> recovery_target_timeline tests I was planning to use the same standb=
y
> >>>> for all the new tests.
> >>>
> >>> Alternatively, we can use $node_primary, since ALTER SYSTEM SET with
> >>> invalid recovery_target_timeline or recovery_target_xid does not
> >>> affect the primary.
> >>
> >> Well, as it turns out I was using the primary after all because I copi=
ed
> >> your example and forgot to update the host. Seems weird to set these
> >> GUCs on the primary but as long as we get the expected errors I don't
> >> suppose it matters.
> >
> > Thanks for updating the patch! I've pushed the patch.
>
> Excellent, thank you!
>
> Attached are the test changes for recovery_target_timeline. I can start
> a new thread and add it to the next CF if you like, but since it is just
> test changes maybe we can fast track it.

Yes, let's discuss and review the patch in this thread.

Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me. Barring any objections, I
will commit it.

Regards,

--=20
Fujii Masao