Re: [HACKERS] Measuring replay lag
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Measuring replay lag |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEepm=0BWVeDh+0GmhHoZKXwwfW2RGMv95Z4UM=3QW-8=kw0EA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Measuring replay lag (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > (replay_lag - (write_lag / 2) may be a cheap proxy > for a lag time that doesn't include the return network leg, and still > doesn't introduce clock difference error) (Upon reflection it's a terrible proxy for that because of the mix of write/flush work done by WAL receiver today, but would improve dramatically if the WAL writer were doing the flushing. A better yet proxy might involve also tracking receive_lag which doesn't include the write() syscall. My real point is that there are ways to work backwards from the two-way round trip time to get other estimates, but no good ways to undo the damage that would be done to the data if we started using two systems' clocks.) -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: