Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:18 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I have attempted to test the performance of (Stream + Spill) vs
> (Stream + BGW pool) and I can see the similar gain what Alexey had
> shown[1].
>
> In addition to this, I have rebased the latest patchset [2] without
> the two-phase logical decoding patch set.
>
> Test results:
> I have repeated the same test as Alexy[1] for 1kk and 1kk data and
> here is my result
> Stream + Spill
> N time on master(sec) Total xact time (sec)
> 1kk 6 21
> 3kk 18 55
>
> Stream + BGW pool
> N time on master(sec) Total xact time (sec)
> 1kk 6 13
> 3kk 19 35
>
> Patch details:
> All the patches are the same as posted on [2] except
> 1. 0006-Gracefully-handle-concurrent-aborts-of-uncommitted -> I have
> removed the handling of error which is specific for 2PC

Here[1], I mentioned that I have removed the 2PC changes from
this[0006] patch but mistakenly I attached the original patch itself
instead of the modified version. So attaching the modified version of
only this patch other patches are the same.

> 2. 0007-Implement-streaming-mode-in-ReorderBuffer -> Rebased without 2PC
> 3. 0009-Extend-the-concurrent-abort-handling-for-in-progress -> New
> patch to handle concurrent abort error for the in-progress transaction
> and also add handling for the sub transaction's abort.
> 4. v3-0014-BGWorkers-pool-for-streamed-transactions-apply -> Rebased
> Alexey's patch

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFiTN-vHoksqvV4BZ0479NhugGe4QHq_ezngNdDd-YRQ_2cwug%40mail.gmail.com

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com