Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 16:15:30 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: Former primary node might stuck when started as a standby
Message-ID: <aaU5EiNHfyMb9Bvu@paquier.xyz>
References: <180bf13e-235d-46a9-9788-7d6cee40bcdc@gmail.com>
 <OS9PR01MB12149E6917AAC1560150B918BF565A@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <cfd35cfb-3216-42b1-814b-cc658fd0f099@gmail.com>
 <OS9PR01MB12149C0F968A40BA54BD4C16FF561A@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <e1cf52d2-c344-4dfd-a918-e5f20ff04fa2@gmail.com>
 <OS9PR01MB121498EFA4CBF3003B83C9BCCF56CA@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <63e55743-669e-4300-a561-7b7ff63723b6@gmail.com>
 <OS9PR01MB12149D4F1A2BC23637688CE4DF56BA@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <045cab6f-4738-417e-b551-01adba44d6c3@gmail.com>
 <c7284102-01fb-4704-8a80-8e65f59fa933@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oZy9W5yxc5d0M/C4"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <c7284102-01fb-4704-8a80-8e65f59fa933@gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aaU5EiNHfyMb9Bvu%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--oZy9W5yxc5d0M/C4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 09:00:00AM +0200, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> As it turned out, v2 patch works as expected, but the test may still fail
> when the build is configured without injection points. Maybe this test (
> and similar one(s)) should be skipped in this case, not sure...

Exactly, I don't see what else we can do here except skip the
sequences of the test that we know may fail if injection points are
not enabled in the build.

Looking at v2, the patch ought to comment the reason *why* these tests
are skipped and *why* an injection point is used.  The reader should
have more details than just a small hint about a set of "random
failures".  I'd suggest to document that once with the first injection
point attached, and have the other blocks hold comments telling to
look at the first block.
--
Michael

--oZy9W5yxc5d0M/C4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=Dmwk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--oZy9W5yxc5d0M/C4--