Horton

Re: speed up a logical replica setup

Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>

View thread
From: "Euler Taveira" <euler@eulerto.com>
To: "Amit Kapila" <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Alexander Lakhin" <exclusion@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Date: 2024-07-30T00:05:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. pg_createsubscriber: Remove obsolete comment

  2. pg_createsubscriber: Fix an unpredictable recovery wait time.

  3. Fix unstable test in 040_pg_createsubscriber.

  4. Fix the testcase introduced in commit 81d20fbf7a.

  5. Further weaken new pg_createsubscriber test on Windows.

  6. Temporarily(?) weaken new pg_createsubscriber test on Windows.

  7. Make pg_createsubscriber warn if publisher has two-phase commit enabled.

  8. Make pg_createsubscriber more wary about quoting connection parameters.

  9. pg_createsubscriber: Remove failover replication slots on subscriber

  10. pg_createsubscriber: Remove replication slot check on primary

  11. pg_createsubscriber: Only --recovery-timeout controls the end of recovery process

  12. pg_createsubscriber: creates a new logical replica from a standby server

  13. Add some const decorations

  14. Add option force_initdb to PostgreSQL::Test::Cluster:init()

  15. Remove MSVC scripts

Attachments

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024, at 6:11 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
> The options are:
> 
> (a) temporary replication slot: requires an additional replication slot.
> small payload. it is extremely slow in comparison with the other
> options.
> (b) logical message: can be consumed by logical replication when/if it
> is supported some day. big payload. fast.
> (c) snapshot of running txn:  small payload. fast.
> (d) named restore point: biggest payload. fast.
> 
> I don't have a strong preference but if I need to pick one I would
> choose option (c) or option (d). The option (a) is out of the question.

I'm attaching a patch that implements option (c). While reading the code
I noticed that I left a comment that should be removed by commit
b9639138262. 0002 removes it.


--
Euler Taveira
EDB   https://www.enterprisedb.com/