Thread

  1. Re: is pg_log_standby_snapshot() really needed?

    Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> — 2023-06-07T18:50:30Z

    On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 5:19 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
    <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Hi,
    >
    > On 6/7/23 7:32 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
    > >
    > > So, I wonder if that function is really needed because as I said I
    > > solved it with already existing functionality. Or if it is really
    > > needed maybe it is a bug that a CHECKPOINT and pg_switch_wal() have
    > > the same effect?
    > >
    >
    > Even if CHECKPOINT and pg_switch_wal() do produce the same effect, I think
    > they are expensive (as compare to pg_log_standby_snapshot() which does nothing but
    > emit a xl_running_xacts).
    >
    > For this reason, I think pg_log_standby_snapshot() is worth to have/keep.
    >
    
    CHECKPOINT could be expensive in a busy system, but the problem
    pg_log_standby_snapshot() is solving is about a no-activity system,
    and in a no-activity system CHECKPOINT is very fast.
    Even with very low activity SUBSCRIPTION flows fine. As an example I
    put an INSERT happening every 10s and SUBSCRIPTION never stuck no
    CHECKPOINT nor pg_log_standby_snapshot() needed.
    
    -- 
    Jaime Casanova
    Director de Servicios Profesionales
    SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL