From: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
Date: | 2023-01-13 10:13:25 |
Message-ID: | OS0PR01MB5716199216FFD4AED083BA8294C29@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, January 13, 2023 1:02 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 1:28 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 9:06 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 7:56 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 3.
> > > >
> > > > <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para
> > > > role="column_definition">
> > > > + <structfield>leader_pid</structfield> <type>integer</type>
> > > > + </para>
> > > > + <para>
> > > > + Process ID of the leader apply worker if this process is a parallel
> > > > + apply worker; NULL if this process is a leader apply worker or
> does not
> > > > + participate in parallel apply, or a synchronization worker
> > > > + </para></entry>
> > > >
> > > > I felt this change is giving too many details and ended up just
> > > > muddying the water.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I see that we give a similar description for other parameters as well.
> > > For example leader_pid in pg_stat_activity,
> > >
> >
> > BTW, shouldn't we update leader_pid column in pg_stat_activity as well
> > to display apply leader PID for parallel apply workers? It will
> > currently display for other parallel operations like a parallel
> > vacuum, so I don't see a reason to not do the same for parallel apply
> > workers.
>
> +1
>
> The parallel apply workers have different properties than the parallel query
> workers since they execute different transactions and don't use group locking
> but it would be a good hint for users to show the leader and parallel apply
> worker processes are related. If users want to check only parallel query workers
> they can use the backend_type column.
Agreed, and changed as suggested.
Attach the new version patch set which address the comments so far.
Best Regards,
Hou zj
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v80-0004-Retry-to-apply-streaming-xact-only-in-apply-work.patch | application/octet-stream | 21.1 KB |
v80-0001-Display-the-leader-apply-worker-s-PID-for-parall.patch | application/octet-stream | 15.4 KB |
v80-0002-Stop-extra-worker-if-GUC-was-changed.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.2 KB |
v80-0003-Add-GUC-stream_serialize_threshold-and-test-seri.patch | application/octet-stream | 13.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-01-13 10:13:31 | RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2023-01-13 10:01:15 | Re: Non-decimal integer literals |