Re: Recovery inconsistencies, standby much larger than primary

Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> So here's my attempt to rewrite this logic. I ended up refactoring a
> bit because I found it unnecessarily confusing having the mode
> branches in several places. I think it's much clearer just having two
> separate pieces of logic for RBM_NEW and the extension cases since all
> they have in common is the ReadBuffer call.

I don't like that at all. It's a lot of unnecessary churn in what is
indeed hard-to-test code, and personally I don't find it clearer.
Nor, if you're going to complain about the cost of smgrnblocks, does
it seem like a great idea to be doing that *twice* per page rather
than once.

How about the attached instead?

regards, tom lane