From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: "Multiple table synchronizations are processed serially" still happens |
Date: | 2021-05-20 20:00:34 |
Message-ID: | CAECtzeVNd+o9LUnRGA_6KpugcsS_6o2241DosSdsEe4=933ABg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Le jeu. 20 mai 2021 à 12:09, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 2:43 PM Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> >
> > And it logs the "still waiting" message as long as the first table is
> being synchronized. Once this is done, it releases the lock, and the
> synchronization of the second table starts.
> >
> > Is there something I didn't understand on the previous thread?
> >
>
> It seems from a script that you are creating a subscription on the
> same node as publication though in a different DB, right?
Yes, that's right.
If so, the
> problem might be that copying the data of the first table creates a
> transaction which blocks creation of the slot for second table copy.
>
I don't understand how a transaction could block the creation of a slot.
Could you explain that to me? or do you know where this is explained in the
documentation?
The commit you referred will just fix the problem while reading the
> data from the publisher not while writing data in the table in the
> subscriber.
>
> > I'd like to know why serial synchronization happens, and if there's a
> way to avoid it.
> >
>
> I guess you need to create a subscription on a different node.
>
>
Thanks.
--
Guillaume.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-05-20 20:35:07 | Re: PG 14 release notes, first draft |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-05-20 19:59:02 | Re: PG 14 release notes, first draft |