Re: Force streaming every change in logical decoding

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 9:29 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 11:53 AM shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com
> <shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi hackers,
> >
> > In logical decoding, when logical_decoding_work_mem is exceeded, the changes are
> > sent to output plugin in streaming mode. But there is a restriction that the
> > minimum value of logical_decoding_work_mem is 64kB. I tried to add a GUC to
> > allow sending every change to output plugin without waiting until
> > logical_decoding_work_mem is exceeded.
> >
> > This helps to test streaming mode. For example, to test "Avoid streaming the
> > transaction which are skipped" [1], it needs many XLOG_XACT_INVALIDATIONS
> > messages. With the new option, it can be tested with fewer changes and in less
> > time. Also, this new option helps to test more scenarios for "Perform streaming
> > logical transactions by background workers" [2].
> >

+1

>
> Yeah, I think this can also help in reducing the time for various
> tests in test_decoding/stream and
> src/test/subscription/t/*_stream_*.pl file by reducing the number of
> changes required to invoke streaming mode. Can we think of making this
> GUC extendible to even test more options on server-side (publisher)
> and client-side (subscriber) cases? For example, we can have something
> like logical_replication_mode with the following valid values: (a)
> server_serialize: this will serialize each change to file on
> publishers and then on commit restore and send all changes; (b)
> server_stream: this will stream each change as currently proposed in
> your patch. Then if we want to extend it for subscriber-side testing
> then we can introduce new options like client_serialize for the case
> being discussed in the email [1].
>
> Thoughts?

There is potential for lots of developer GUCs for testing/debugging in
the area of logical replication but IMO it might be better to keep
them all separated. Putting everything into a single
'logical_replication_mode' might cause difficulties later when/if you
want combinations of the different modes.

For example, instead of

logical_replication_mode = XXX/YYY/ZZZ

maybe something like below will give more flexibility.

logical_replication_dev_XXX = true/false
logical_replication_dev_YYY = true/false
logical_replication_dev_ZZZ = true/false

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia