Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication
От | Aleksander Alekseev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJ7c6TMpYybu1NO3BTL_PUSx35hDrQQLbkmcK6_xGOZSnwgXXg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication (Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Rahila, > Please find attached a POC patch that introduces changes to the WAL sender and > receiver, allowing WAL records to be sent to standbys before they are flushed > to disk on the primary during physical replication. [..] I didn't look at the code but your description of the design sounds OK. I wanted to clarify: what happens if master doesn't increase flushPtr and replica runs out of memory for WAL records? > Benchmark details are as follows: > Synchronous replication with remote write enabled. > Two Azure VMs: Central India (primary), Central US (standby). > [...] I'm curious what happens: 1. When master and replica are located in the same datacenter. 2. What happens for small transactions? -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: