Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush()

On Sep 18, 2025, at 07:20, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 09:40:50AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:

As a whole, the patch looks like a good balance, able to satisfy the
new case you want to handle, Melanie.  I am guessing that you'd want
to tweak it and apply it yourself, so please feel free.

Hearing nothing, I'd like to move ahead with this improvement.  I have
tweaked a bit the comments, as suggested.  If one switches the check
of XLogNeedsFlush() from XLogInsertAllowed() to RecoveryInProgress(),
the recovery test 015 blows up as expected.

Any opinions or more word-smithing required?
--
Michael
<v3-0001-Make-XLogFlush-and-XLogNeedsFlush-decision-more-c.patch>