On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 6:30 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
<wangw.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 1:59 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 4:32 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> > typedef void (*LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress) (struct
> > LogicalDecodingContext *lr,
> > XLogRecPtr Ptr,
> > TransactionId xid,
> > - bool skipped_xact
> > + bool skipped_xact,
> > + bool last_write
> >
> > In this approach, I don't think we need an additional parameter last_write.
> > Let's
> > do the work related to keepalive without a parameter, do you see any problem
> > with that?
> I agree with you. Modify this point.
>
> > I think this patch doesn't take into account that we call
> > OutputPluginUpdateProgress() from APIs like pgoutput_commit_txn(). I
> > think we should always call the new function update_progress from
> > those existing call sites and arrange the function such that when
> > called from xact end APIs like pgoutput_commit_txn(), it always call
> > OutputPluginUpdateProgress and make changes_count as 0.
> Improve it.
> Add two new input to function update_progress.(skipped_xact and end_xact).
> Modify the function invoke from OutputPluginUpdateProgress to update_progress.
>
> > Also, let's try to evaluate how it impacts lag functionality for large
> > transactions?
> I think this patch will not affect lag functionality. It will updates the lag
> field of view pg_stat_replication more frequently.
> IIUC, when invoking function WalSndUpdateProgress, it will store the lsn of
> change and invoking time in lag_tracker. Then when invoking function
> ProcessStandbyReplyMessage, it will calculate the lag field according to the
> message from subscriber and the information in lag_tracker. This patch does
> not modify this logic, but only increases the frequency of invoking.
> Please let me know if I understand wrong.
>
No, your understanding seems correct to me. But what I want to check
is if calling the progress function more often has any impact on
lag-related fields in pg_stat_replication? I think you need to check
the impact of large transaction replay.
One comment:
+static void
+update_progress(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, bool skipped_xact, bool end_xact)
+{
+ static int changes_count = 0;
+
+ if (end_xact)
+ {
+ /* Update progress tracking at xact end. */
+ OutputPluginUpdateProgress(ctx, skipped_xact);
+ changes_count = 0;
+ }
+ /*
+ * After continuously processing CHANGES_THRESHOLD changes, update progress
+ * which will also try to send a keepalive message if required.
I think you can simply return after making changes_count = 0. There
should be an empty line before starting the next comment.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
