| From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com, smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com, vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com, shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, euler(at)eulerto(dot)com, m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) |
| Date: | 2023-02-14 02:27:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20230214.112725.256233803229367792.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Mon, 13 Feb 2023 15:51:25 +0530, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> I think we can introduce a new variable as last_feedback_time in the
> LogicalRepWorker structure and probably for the last_received, we can
> last_lsn in MyLogicalRepWorker as that seems to be updated correctly.
> I think it would be good to avoid global variables.
MyLogicalRepWorker is a global variable:p, but it is far better than a
bear one.
By the way, we are trying to send the status messages regularly, but
as Andres pointed out, worker does not read nor reply to keepalive
messages from publisher while delaying. It is not possible as far as
we choke the stream at the subscriber end. It doesn't seem to be a
practical problem, but IMHO I think he's right in terms of adherence
to the wire protocol, which was also one of my own initial concern.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-02-14 02:43:35 | Re: Buffer usage detailed by RelKind in EXPLAIN ANALYZE BUFFERS |
| Previous Message | Andrey Borodin | 2023-02-14 02:14:58 | Re: Buffer usage detailed by RelKind in EXPLAIN ANALYZE BUFFERS |