Re: row filtering for logical replication
Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Release cache tuple when no longer needed
- ed0fbc8e5ac9 15.0 landed
-
Add some additional tests for row filters in logical replication.
- ceb57afd3ce1 15.0 landed
-
Fix one of the tests introduced in commit 52e4f0cd47.
- cfb4e209ec15 15.0 landed
-
Allow specifying row filters for logical replication of tables.
- 52e4f0cd472d 15.0 landed
-
Move scanint8() to numutils.c
- cfc7191dfea3 15.0 cited
-
Replace Test::More plans with done_testing
- 549ec201d613 15.0 cited
-
Reduce relcache access in WAL sender streaming logical changes
- 6ce16088bfed 15.0 cited
-
Small cleanups related to PUBLICATION framework code
- c9105dd3660f 15.0 cited
-
Add a view to show the stats of subscription workers.
- 8d74fc96db5f 15.0 cited
-
Allow publishing the tables of schema.
- 5a2832465fd8 15.0 cited
-
Doc: improve documentation of CREATE/ALTER SUBSCRIPTION.
- 1882d6cca161 15.0 cited
-
Add PublicationTable and PublicationRelInfo structs
- 0c6828fa987b 15.0 cited
-
Remove unused argument "txn" in maybe_send_schema().
- 93d573d86571 15.0 cited
-
Add prepare API support for streaming transactions in logical replication.
- 63cf61cdeb7b 15.0 cited
-
Unify PostgresNode's new() and get_new_node() methods
- 201a76183e20 15.0 cited
-
Use l*_node() family of functions where appropriate
- 2b00db4fb0c7 15.0 cited
-
Add support for prepared transactions to built-in logical replication.
- a8fd13cab0ba 15.0 cited
-
Restore the portal-level snapshot after procedure COMMIT/ROLLBACK.
- ef9480509622 11.13 cited
-
Rename a parse node to be more general
- 91d1f2d30210 14.0 landed
-
Remove unused column atttypmod from initial tablesync query
- 4ad31bb2ef25 14.0 landed
-
SEARCH and CYCLE clauses
- 3696a600e229 14.0 cited
Attachments
- workload-b.PNG (image/png)
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 8:16 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > I just tried scenario b that Andres suggested: > > For scenario b, I did some testing with row-filter-patch v74 and > various levels of filtering. 0% replicated to 100% rows replicated. > The times are in seconds, I did 5 runs each. > > Results: > > RUN HEAD "with patch 0%" "row-filter-patch 25%" "row-filter-patch > v74 50%" "row-filter-patch 75%" "row-filter-patch v74 100%" > 1 17.26178 12.573736 12.869635 13.742167 > 17.977112 17.75814 > 2 17.522473 12.919554 12.640879 14.202737 > 14.515481 16.961836 > 3 17.124001 12.640879 12.706631 14.220245 > 15.686613 17.219355 > 4 17.24122 12.602345 12.674566 14.219423 > 15.564312 17.432765 > 5 17.25352 12.610657 12.689842 14.210725 > 15.613708 17.403821 > > As can see the performance seen on HEAD is similar to that which the > patch achieves with all rows (100%) replication. The performance > improves linearly with > more rows filtered. > > The test scenario used was: > > 1. On publisher and subscriber: > CREATE TABLE test (key int, value text, data jsonb, PRIMARY KEY(key, value)); > > 2. On publisher: (based on which scenario is being tested) > CREATE PUBLICATION pub_1 FOR TABLE test WHERE (key > 0); -- 100% allowed > CREATE PUBLICATION pub_1 FOR TABLE test WHERE (key > 250000); -- 75% allowed > CREATE PUBLICATION pub_1 FOR TABLE test WHERE (key > 500000); -- 50% allowed > CREATE PUBLICATION pub_1 FOR TABLE test WHERE (key > 750000); -- 25% allowed > CREATE PUBLICATION pub_1 FOR TABLE test WHERE (key > 1000000); -- 0% allowed > > 3. On the subscriber: > CREATE SUBSCRIPTION sync_sub CONNECTION 'host=127.0.0.1 port=5432 > dbname=postgres application_name=sync_sub' PUBLICATION pub_1; > > 4. now modify the postgresql.conf on the publisher side > synchronous_standby_names = 'sync_sub' and restart. > > 5. The test case: > > DO > $do$ > BEGIN > FOR i IN 1..1000001 BY 10 LOOP > INSERT INTO test VALUES(i,'BAH', row_to_json(row(i))); > UPDATE test SET value = 'FOO' WHERE key = i; > IF I % 1000 = 0 THEN > COMMIT; > END IF; > END LOOP; > END > $do$; > > Thanks! I have put your results as a bar chart same as for the previous workload case: HEAD 17.25 v74 no filters NA v74 allow 100% 17.35 v74 allow 75% 15.62 v74 allow 50% 14.21 v74 allow 25% 12.69 v74 allow 0% 12.62 PSA. ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia.