| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vladimir Borodin <root(at)simply(dot)name> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records |
| Date: | 2016-01-06 15:20:00 |
| Message-ID: | 20160106152000.GA361349@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Vladimir Borodin wrote:
> There are situations in which vacuuming big btree index causes stuck
> in WAL replaying on hot standby servers for quite a long time. I’ve
> described the problem in more details in this thread [0]. Below in
> that thread Kevin Grittner proposed a good way for improving btree
> scans so that btree vacuuming logic could be seriously simplified.
> Since I don’t know when that may happen I’ve done a patch that makes
> some improvement right now. If Kevin or someone else would expand [1]
> for handling all types of btree scans, I suppose, my patch could be
> thrown away and vacuuming logic should be strongly rewritten.
You submitted this patch in May 2015 -- and 7 months later, Simon came
up with another patch that's supposed to fix the underlying problem, so
that this shouldn't be a problem anymore.
Would you please have a look at Simon's patch, in particular verify
whether it solves the performance dip in your testing environment?
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjJuyExr1HnTAdZraWsWkfc-octhug7YPtzPtJcYbyi4pA%40mail.gmail.com
(Note there's an updated patch a few emails down the thread.)
If it seems to fix the problem for you, I think we should mark yours
rejected and just apply Simon's.
Thanks!
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2016-01-06 15:21:32 | Re: Add numeric_trim(numeric) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-01-06 14:51:50 | Re: Comment typo in namespace.c |