Re: Logical replication keepalive flood
От | Kyotaro Horiguchi |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Logical replication keepalive flood |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20210608.140928.1188857650690751698.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Logical replication keepalive flood (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Logical replication keepalive flood
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
At Tue, 08 Jun 2021 10:05:36 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote in > At Mon, 7 Jun 2021 15:26:05 +0500, Abbas Butt <abbas.butt@enterprisedb.com> wrote in > > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 3:13 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am not sure sending feedback every time before sleep is a good idea, > > > this might lead to unnecessarily sending more messages. Can we try by > > > using one-second interval with -s option to see how it behaves? As a > > > matter of comparison the similar logic in workers.c uses > > > wal_receiver_timeout to send such an update message rather than > > > sending it every time before sleep. > > Logical walreceiver sends a feedback when walrcv_eceive() doesn't > receive a byte. If its' not good that pg_recvlogical does the same > thing, do we need to improve logical walsender's behavior as well? For the clarity, only the change in the walsender side can stop the flood. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: