On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 at 21:16, Euler Taveira <euler@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