Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jakub Wartak <Jakub(dot)Wartak(at)tomtom(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date: 2022-03-08 13:48:54
Message-ID: 1392587c-c56a-2816-e3cf-4202a216a3be@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/8/22 06:15, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 5:29 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> https://github.com/macdice/postgres/tree/recovery-prefetch-ii
>
> Here's a rebase. This mostly involved moving hunks over to the new
> xlogrecovery.c file. One thing that seemed a little strange to me
> with the new layout is that xlogreader is now a global variable. I
> followed that pattern and made xlogprefetcher a global variable too,
> for now.
>
> There is one functional change: now I block readahead at records that
> might change the timeline ID. This removes the need to think about
> scenarios where "replay TLI" and "read TLI" might differ. I don't
> know of a concrete problem in that area with the previous version, but
> the recent introduction of the variable(s) "replayTLI" and associated
> comments in master made me realise I hadn't analysed the hazards here
> enough. Since timelines are tricky things and timeline changes are
> extremely infrequent, it seemed better to simplify matters by putting
> up a big road block there.
>
> I'm now starting to think about committing this soon.

+1. I don't have the capacity/hardware to do more testing at the moment,
but all of this looks reasonable.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2022-03-08 14:38:00 Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup
Previous Message Andy Fan 2022-03-08 13:44:37 Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?