Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Tighten the concurrent abort check during decoding.
- 2ce353fc1902 14.0 landed
-
Improve hash_create()'s API for some added robustness.
- b3817f5f7746 14.0 landed
-
Use HASH_BLOBS for xidhash.
- a1b8aa1e4eec 14.0 landed
-
Fix initialization of RelationSyncEntry for streaming transactions.
- 69bd60672af6 14.0 landed
-
Remove unused function declaration in logicalproto.h.
- ddd5f6d2609b 14.0 landed
-
Add additional tests to test streaming of in-progress transactions.
- 58b5ae9d62bd 14.0 landed
-
Fix inline marking introduced in commit 464824323e.
- ac15b499f7f9 14.0 landed
-
Add support for streaming to built-in logical replication.
- 464824323e57 14.0 landed
-
Fix the SharedFileSetUnregister API.
- 4ab77697f67a 14.0 landed
-
Fix comment in procarray.c
- 77c7267c37f7 14.0 cited
-
Suppress compiler warning in non-cassert builds.
- e942af7b8261 14.0 cited
-
Extend the BufFile interface.
- 808e13b282ef 14.0 landed
-
Mark a few logical decoding related variables with PGDLLIMPORT.
- b48cac3b10a0 14.0 landed
-
Implement streaming mode in ReorderBuffer.
- 7259736a6e5b 14.0 landed
-
Extend the logical decoding output plugin API with stream methods.
- 45fdc9738b36 14.0 landed
-
WAL Log invalidations at command end with wal_level=logical.
- c55040ccd017 14.0 landed
-
Immediately WAL-log subtransaction and top-level XID association.
- 0bead9af484c 14.0 landed
-
Allow logical replication to transfer data in binary format.
- 9de77b545313 14.0 cited
-
Only superuser can set sslcert/sslkey in postgres_fdw user mappings
- cebf9d6e6ee1 13.0 cited
-
Track statistics for spilling of changes from ReorderBuffer.
- 9290ad198b15 13.0 landed
-
Add logical_decoding_work_mem to limit ReorderBuffer memory usage.
- cec2edfa7859 13.0 landed
-
logical decoding: process ASSIGNMENT during snapshot build
- bac2fae05c77 13.0 cited
-
Emit invalidations to standby for transactions without xid.
- c6ff84b06a68 9.6.0 cited
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 3:41 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think we have evaluated it yet, but we should do it. The > point to note is that it is only for the case when wal_level is > 'logical' (see IsSubTransactionAssignmentPending) in which case we > already log more WAL, so this might not impact much. I guess that it > might be better to have that check in XLogRecordAssemble for the sake > of clarity. I don't think that this is really a valid argument. Just because we have some overhead now doesn't mean that adding more won't hurt. Even testing the wal_level costs a little something. > I think the way invalidations work for logical replication is that > normally, we always start a new transaction before decoding each > commit which allows us to accept the invalidations (via > AtStart_Cache). However, if there are catalog changes within the > transaction being decoded, we need to reflect those before trying to > decode the WAL of operation which happened after that catalog change. > As we are not logging the WAL for each invalidation, we need to > execute all the invalidation messages for this transaction at each > catalog change. We are able to do that now as we decode the entire WAL > for a transaction only once we get the commit's WAL which contains all > the invalidation messages. So, we queue them up and execute them for > each catalog change which we identify by WAL record > XLOG_HEAP2_NEW_CID. Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. But, it's still true, AFAICS, that instead of doing this stuff with logging invalidations you could just InvalidateSystemCaches() in the cases where you are currently applying all of the transaction's invalidations. That approach might be worse than changing the way invalidations are logged, but the two approaches deserve to be compared. One approach has more CPU overhead and the other has more WAL overhead, so it's a little hard to compare them, but it seems worth mulling over. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company