On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 7:03 PM Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can find the updated patchset attached.
> I worked to address the reviews and made some additional changes.
>
> Let me first explain the new patchset.
> 0001: Refactors the logical replication code, mostly worker.c and
> tablesync.c. Although this patch makes it easier to reuse workers, I
> believe that it's useful even by itself without other patches. It does
> not improve performance or anything but aims to increase readability
> and such.
> 0002: This is only to reuse worker processes, everything else stays
> the same (replication slots/origins etc.).
> 0003: Adds a new command for streaming replication protocol to create
> a snapshot by an existing replication slot.
> 0004: Reuses replication slots/origins together with workers.
>
> Even only 0001 and 0002 are enough to improve table sync performance
> at the rates previously shared on this thread. This also means that
> currently 0004 (reusing replication slots/origins) does not improve as
> much as I would expect, even though it does not harm either.
> I just wanted to share what I did so far, while I'm continuing to
> investigate it more to see what I'm missing in patch 0004.
>
I think the reason why you don't see the benefit of the 0004 patches
is that it still pays the cost of disconnect/connect and we haven't
saved much on network transfer costs because of the new snapshot you
are creating in patch 0003. Is it possible to avoid disconnect/connect
each time the patch needs to reuse the same tablesync worker? Once, we
do that and save the cost of drop_slot and associated network round
trip, you may see the benefit of 0003 and 0004 patches.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.