From: | tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |
Date: | 2019-07-17 11:24:55 |
Message-ID: | f02fe977-22bc-bdd4-5828-140f51fcc583@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/16/2019 10:56 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Even after calling pg_logical_slot_get_changes() multiple times? What
> does
> SELECT * FROM pg_replication_slots; before and after multiple calls return?
>
> Does manually forcing a checkpoint with CHECKPOINT; first on the primary
> and then the standby "fix" the issue?
>
Yes,eventually it gets clean up -after firing multiple times get_changes
function or checkpoint or even both.
This same behavior we are able to see on MASTER -with or without patch.
but is this an old (existing) issue ?
>> b)pg_wal files are not recycling and every time it is creating new files
>> after firing get_changes function
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that
> pg_logical_slot_get_changes() causes WAL to be written?
No, when i said - created new WAL files , i meant -after each pg_bench
run NOT after executing get_changes.
--
regards,tushar
EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2019-07-17 11:31:05 | Re: [PATCH] vacuumlo: print the number of large objects going to be removed |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2019-07-17 11:10:52 | Re: Tid scan improvements |