Hi,
In WalSndLoop() we do:
wakeEvents = WL_LATCH_SET | WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH | WL_TIMEOUT |
WL_SOCKET_READABLE;
if (pq_is_send_pending())
wakeEvents |= WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE;
else if (wal_sender_timeout > 0 && !ping_sent)
{
...
if (GetCurrentTimestamp() >= timeout)
WalSndKeepalive(true);
...
I think those two if's should simply be separate. There's no reason not
to ask for a ping when we're writing. On a busy server that might be the
case most of the time.
The if (pq_is_send_pending()) should also be *after* sending the
keepalive, after all, it might not immediately have been flushed as
unlikely as that is.
The attached patch is unsurprisingly simple.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
diff --git a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
index 06b22e2..41db03d 100644
--- a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
+++ b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
@@ -1270,9 +1270,7 @@ WalSndLoop(void)
wakeEvents = WL_LATCH_SET | WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH | WL_TIMEOUT |
WL_SOCKET_READABLE;
- if (pq_is_send_pending())
- wakeEvents |= WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE;
- else if (wal_sender_timeout > 0 && !ping_sent)
+ if (wal_sender_timeout > 0 && !ping_sent)
{
/*
* If half of wal_sender_timeout has lapsed without receiving
@@ -1291,6 +1289,9 @@ WalSndLoop(void)
}
}
+ if (pq_is_send_pending())
+ wakeEvents |= WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE;
+
/* Determine time until replication timeout */
if (wal_sender_timeout > 0)
{
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
