| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION |
| Date: | 2022-12-14 18:37:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20221214183759.GC773264@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 01:23:18PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm reasonably certain the launcher is already signaled like you describe.
>> It'll just wait to start new workers if it's been less than
>> wal_retrieve_retry_interval milliseconds since the last time it started
>> workers.
>
> Oh. What in the world is the rationale for that?
My assumption is that this is meant to avoid starting workers as fast as
possible if they repeatedly crash. I didn't see much discussion in the
original logical replication thread [0], but I do see follow-up discussion
about creating a separate GUC for this [1] [2].
[0] https://postgr.es/m/b8132323-b577-428c-b2aa-bf41a66b18e7%402ndquadrant.com
[1] https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoAjTTGm%2BOx70b2OGWvb77vPcRdYeRv3gkAWx76nXDo%2BEA%40mail.gmail.com
[2] https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoDCnyRJDUY%3DESVVe68AukvOP2dFomTeBFpAd1TiFbjsGg%40mail.gmail.com
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikita Malakhov | 2022-12-14 18:56:12 | Re: collect_corrupt_items_vacuum.patch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-12-14 18:23:18 | Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION |