On 23.03.22 13:58, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> If you want to wait for libpq to provide a solution for this corner
> case, I'm afraid that "never" is the likely result, especially as no
> test case exercices this path to show that there is a problem somewhere,
> so nobody should care to fix it. I'm not sure it is even worth it given
> the highly special situation which triggers the issue, which is not such
> an actual problem (ok, the user is told twice that there was a
> connection loss, no big deal).
As Tom said earlier, wasn't this fixed by 618c16707? If not, is there
any other discussion on the specifics of this issue? I'm not aware of one.