Re: prevent immature WAL streaming

On 2021-Sep-30, Tom Lane wrote:

> Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water:
> 
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=prairiedog&dt=2021-09-29%2022%3A05%3A44
> 
> which is complaining that the (misspelled, BTW)

Ah, the case of the missing juxtaposed consonants.  Les Luthiers have
something to say on that matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptorPqV7D5s

> log message 'sucessfully skipped missing contrecord at' doesn't show
> up.

Hmm.  Well, as I said, maybe this part of the test isn't worth much
anyway.  Rather than spending time trying to figure out why isn't this
triggering the WAL overwriting, I compared the coverage report for
running only the first test to the coverage report of running only the
second test.  It turns out that there's no relevant coverage increase in
the second test.  So I propose just removing that part.

(The reason I added that test in the first place was to try to reproduce
the problem without having to physically unlink a WAL file from the
primary's pg_wal subdir.  But maybe it's just make-work.)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/