Hi,
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 06:10:32AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> WalSndWaitForWal() is being used only for logical walsender. So we'd need to
> find another location for the physical walsender case. One option is to keep
> the
> WalSndLoop() location and control the reports frequency.
I
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 09:23:50AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:54:39AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > So it does not look like what we're adding here can be seen as a primary
> > bottleneck
> > but that is probably worth implementing the "have_iostats" optim
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 02:52:42PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 09:23:50AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:54:39AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > > So it does not look like what we're adding here can be seen as a primary
>
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:54:39AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> So it does not look like what we're adding here can be seen as a primary
> bottleneck
> but that is probably worth implementing the "have_iostats" optimization
> attached.
>
> Also, while I did not measure any noticeable extra l
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 10:51:19AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 10:39:31AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > That sounds a good idea to measure the impact of those extra calls and see
> > if we'd need to mitigate the impacts. I'll collect some data.
So I did some t
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 10:39:31AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> That sounds a good idea to measure the impact of those extra calls and see
> if we'd need to mitigate the impacts. I'll collect some data.
Thanks.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 02:41:34PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 09:48:50AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Yeah I think that makes sense, done that way in the attached.
> >
> > Speaking about physical walsender, I moved the test to 001_stream_rep.pl
> > instead
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 02:41:34PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> With smaller records, the loop can become hotter, can't it? Also,
> there can be a high number of WAL senders on a single node, and I've
> heard of some customers with complex logical decoding deployments with
> dozens of logical W
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 09:48:50AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Yeah I think that makes sense, done that way in the attached.
>
> Speaking about physical walsender, I moved the test to 001_stream_rep.pl
> instead
> (would also fail without the fix).
Hmm. I was doing some more checks with th
On 2025-02-27 12:09:46 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I suspect that there would be cases where a single stats kind should be able
> to handle both transactional and non-transactional flush cases. Splitting
> that across two stats kinds would lead to a lot of duplication.
Agreed. Table stats wil
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 05:08:17AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-02-26 15:37:10 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > That's bad, worse for a logical WAL sender, because it means that we
> > have no idea what kind of I/O happens in this process until it exits,
> > and logical WAL
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 05:08:17AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think it's also bad that we don't have a solution for 1), even just for
> normal connections. If a backend causes a lot of IO we might want to know
> about that long before the longrunning transaction commits.
>
> I suspect the rig
Hi,
On 2025-02-26 15:37:10 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That's bad, worse for a logical WAL sender, because it means that we
> have no idea what kind of I/O happens in this process until it exits,
> and logical WAL senders could loop forever, since v16 where we've
> begun tracking I/O.
FWIW, I
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 03:37:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 01:42:08PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Now we can see that the numbers increased for the relation object and that
> > we
> > get non zeros numbers for the wal object too (which makes fully sense)
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 01:42:08PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Now we can see that the numbers increased for the relation object and that we
> get non zeros numbers for the wal object too (which makes fully sense).
>
> With the attached patch applied, we would get the same numbers already in
15 matches
Mail list logo
