Re: Excessive PostmasterIsAlive calls slow down WAL redo

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Excessive PostmasterIsAlive calls slow down WAL redo
Date: 2018-04-06 05:08:36
Message-ID: 20180406050836.GG4031@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 02:39:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> While it's not POSIX, at least some platforms are capable of delivering
> a separate signal on parent process death. Perhaps using that where
> available would be enough of an answer.

Are you referring to prctl here?

+1 on improving performance of PostmasterIsAlive() if possible instead
of checking for it every N records. You barely see records creating a
database from a large template close to each other but that could hurt
the response time of the redo process.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2018-04-06 05:38:15 Re: csv format for psql
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-04-06 04:55:54 Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask