From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM |
Date: | 2016-01-10 16:32:05 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY3ztEe8PJnYu_goAmyUXYjDaBbDhf-puBTjADS8GtpfQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM
> Replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM during Hot Standby was previously thought to require
> complex interlocking that matched the requirements on the master. This required
> an O(N) operation that became a significant problem with large indexes, causing
> replication delays of seconds or in some cases minutes while the
> XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM was replayed.
>
> This commit skips the “pin scan” that was previously required, by observing in
> detail when and how it is safe to do so, with full documentation. The pin scan
> is skipped only in replay; the VACUUM code path on master is not touched here.
>
> The current commit still performs the pin scan for toast indexes, though this
> can also be avoided if we recheck scans on toast indexes. Later patch will
> address this.
>
> No tests included. Manual tests using an additional patch to view WAL records
> and their timing have shown the change in WAL records and their handling has
> successfully reduced replication delay.
I suspect I might be missing something here, but I don't see how a
test against rel->rd_rel->relnamespace can work during recovery.
Won't the relcache entry we're looking at here be one created by
CreateFakeRelcacheEntry(), and thus that field won't be valid?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2016-01-10 20:50:43 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-01-10 13:57:32 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Blind attempt at a Cygwin fix |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-10 16:48:34 | Re: Fwd: Re: [DOCS] Document Upper Limit for NAMEDATELEN in pgsql 9.5+ |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-01-10 13:57:32 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Blind attempt at a Cygwin fix |