On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 4:26 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人 <kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > Thanks for your test and comments.
> Some codes were added in ReorderBufferProcessTXN() for treating DDL, > but I doubted updating accept_writes is needed. > IMU, the parameter is read by OutputPluginPrepareWrite() in order align > messages. > They should have a header - like 'w' - before their body. But here only a > keepalive message is sent, > no meaningful changes, so I think it might be not needed. > I commented out the line and tested like you did [1], and no timeout and > errors > were found. > Do you have any reasons for that? > > https://www.postgresql.org/message- > id/OS3PR01MB6275A95FD44DC6C46058EA389E3B9%40OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd0 > 1.prod.outlook.com Yes, you are right. We should not set accept_writes to true here. And I looked into the function WalSndUpdateProgress. I found function WalSndUpdateProgress try to record the time of some message(by function LagTrackerWrite) sent to subscriber, such as in function pgoutput_commit_txn. Then, when publisher receives the reply message from the subscriber(function ProcessStandbyReplyMessage), publisher invokes LagTrackerRead to calculate the delay time(refer to view pg_stat_replication). Referring to the purpose of LagTrackerWrite, I think it is no need to log time when sending keepalive messages here. So when the parameter send_keep_alive of function WalSndUpdateProgress is true, skip the recording time. > I'm also happy if you give the version number :-). Introduce version information, starting from version 1. Attach the new patch. 1. Fix wrong variable setting and skip unnecessary time records.[suggestion by Kuroda-San and me.] 2. Introduce version information.[suggestion by Peter, Kuroda-San] Regards, Wang wei
v1-0001-Fix-the-timeout-of-subscriber-in-long-transaction.patch
Description: v1-0001-Fix-the-timeout-of-subscriber-in-long-transaction.patch
