From: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <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: | Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
Date: | 2025-01-08 11:00:24 |
Message-ID: | OS0PR01MB571667A81BAD6BF935F28A0F94122@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday, January 8, 2025 6:33 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
Hi,
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 1:53 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 3:02 PM Masahiko Sawada
> <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:11 PM Nisha Moond
> <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [3] Test with pgbench run on both publisher and subscriber.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Test setup:
> > > >
> > > > - Tests performed on pgHead + v16 patches
> > > >
> > > > - Created a pub-sub replication system.
> > > >
> > > > - Parameters for both instances were:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > share_buffers = 30GB
> > > >
> > > > min_wal_size = 10GB
> > > >
> > > > max_wal_size = 20GB
> > > >
> > > > autovacuum = false
> > >
> > > Since you disabled autovacuum on the subscriber, dead tuples created
> > > by non-hot updates are accumulated anyway regardless of
> > > detect_update_deleted setting, is that right?
> > >
> >
> > I think hot-pruning mechanism during the update operation will remove
> > dead tuples even when autovacuum is disabled.
>
> True, but why did it disable autovacuum? It seems that case1-2_setup.sh
> doesn't specify fillfactor, which makes hot-updates less likely to happen.
IIUC, we disable autovacuum as a general practice in read-write tests for
stable TPS numbers.
>
> I understand that a certain performance dip happens due to dead tuple
> retention, which is fine, but I'm surprised that the TPS decreased by 50% within
> 120 seconds. The TPS goes even worse for a longer test?
We will try to increase the time and run the test again.
> I did a quick
> benchmark where I completely disabled removing dead tuples (by
> autovacuum=off and a logical slot) and ran pgbench but I didn't see such a
> precipitous dip.
I think a logical slot only retain the dead tuples on system catalog,
so the TPS on user table would not be affected that much.
Best Regards,
Hou zj
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2025-01-08 11:03:07 | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-01-08 10:49:10 | Re: SCRAM pass-through authentication for postgres_fdw |