Re: pgsql: When WalSndCaughtUp, sleep only in WalSndWaitForWal().
От | Noah Misch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: When WalSndCaughtUp, sleep only in WalSndWaitForWal(). |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200417054412.GB1061007@rfd.leadboat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: When WalSndCaughtUp, sleep only in WalSndWaitForWal(). (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>) |
Список | pgsql-committers |
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 04:50:38AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On 2020/04/12 2:35, Noah Misch wrote: > >When WalSndCaughtUp, sleep only in WalSndWaitForWal(). > > > >Before sleeping, WalSndWaitForWal() sends a keepalive if MyWalSnd->write > >< sentPtr. That is important in logical replication. When the latest > >physical LSN yields no logical replication messages (a common case), > >that keepalive elicits a reply, and processing the reply updates > >pg_stat_replication.replay_lsn. WalSndLoop() lacks that; when > >WalSndLoop() slept, replay_lsn advancement could stall until > >wal_receiver_status_interval elapsed. This sometimes stalled > >src/test/subscription/t/001_rep_changes.pl for up to 10s. > > Since this commit, walsender started consuming CPU resource too much in my env. Confirmed. I have shared this with the main thread and added details there. > wakeEvents = WL_LATCH_SET | WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH | WL_TIMEOUT | > - WL_SOCKET_READABLE; > + WL_SOCKET_READABLE | WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE; > > I wonder if this change caused WaitLatchOrSocket() in WalSndLoop() to wake up > frequently more than necessary. I collected lower wakeup counts after the commit. The problem is a shortage of waits.
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: