| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 001_rep_changes.pl stalls |
| Date: | 2020-04-21 02:25:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20200421022505.GF77439@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 07:24:28PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> I was misreading this as something like "any other blocking than
> the blocking in WalSndLoop()". Ok, I have no more comments on
> the patch.
Patch looks rather sane to me at quick glance. I can see that WAL
senders are now not stuck at 100% CPU per process when sitting idle,
for both physical and logical replication. Thanks.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2020-04-21 02:35:15 | Re: Do we need to handle orphaned prepared transactions in the server? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-04-21 02:15:01 | Re: [BUG] non archived WAL removed during production crash recovery |