From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Throttling WAL inserts when the standby falls behind more than the configured replica_lag_in_bytes |
Date: | 2021-12-26 05:25:06 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-ufohibu=h1nY-hoA7YRV3qgerx=oBt41_r1xMSV+x1dg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 10:36 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <
satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Actually all the WAL insertions are done under a critical section (except
>> few exceptions), that means if you see all the references of XLogInsert(),
>> it is always called under the critical section and that is my main worry
>> about hooking at XLogInsert level.
>>
>
> Got it, understood the concern. But can we document the limitations of the
> hook and let the hook take care of it? I don't expect an error to be thrown
> here since we are not planning to allocate memory or make file system calls
> but instead look at the shared memory state and add delays when required.
>
>
Yet another problem is that if we are in XlogInsert() that means we are
holding the buffer locks on all the pages we have modified, so if we add a
hook at that level which can make it wait then we would also block any of
the read operations needed to read from those buffers. I haven't thought
what could be better way to do this but this is certainly not good.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2021-12-26 06:46:41 | Re: Foreign key joins revisited |
Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2021-12-26 05:23:31 | Re: Throttling WAL inserts when the standby falls behind more than the configured replica_lag_in_bytes |