From: | "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrice Chapuis <fabrice636861(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | RE: Logical replication timeout problem |
Date: | 2022-04-18 06:19:15 |
Message-ID: | OS3PR01MB62754D7C91CE80B3A68FFC1A9EF39@OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thur, Apr 14, 2022 at 8:21 PM Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> wrote:
>
Thanks for your comments.
> + * For a large transaction, if we don't send any change to the downstream for a
> + * long time then it can timeout. This can happen when all or most of the
> + * changes are either not published or got filtered out.
>
> We should probable mention that "long time" is wal_receiver_timeout on
> subscriber.
Improve as suggested.
Add "(exceeds the wal_receiver_timeout of standby)" to explain what "long time"
means.
> + * change as that can have overhead. Testing reveals that there is no
> + * noticeable overhead in doing it after continuously processing 100 or so
> + * changes.
>
> Tests revealed that ...
Improve as suggested.
> + * We don't have a mechanism to get the ack for any LSN other than end xact
> + * lsn from the downstream. So, we track lag only for end xact lsn's.
>
> s/lsn/LSN/ and s/lsn's/LSNs/
>
> I would say "end of transaction LSN".
Improve as suggested.
> + * If too many changes are processed then try to send a keepalive message to
> + * receiver to avoid timeouts.
>
> In logical replication, if too many changes are processed then try to send a
> keepalive message. It might avoid a timeout in the subscriber.
Improve as suggested.
Kindly have a look at new patch shared in [1].
Regards,
Wang wei
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2022-04-18 06:25:49 | RE: pg_get_publication_tables() output duplicate relid |
Previous Message | wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2022-04-18 06:16:40 | RE: Logical replication timeout problem |