RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply

Wei Wang (Fujitsu) <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>

From: "wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com" <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>
To: "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, "shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com" <shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com>, "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-08-04T06:37:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thurs, Jul 28, 2022 at 13:20 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人 <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Wang-san,
> 
> Hi, I'm also interested in the patch and I started to review this.
> Followings are comments about 0001.

Thanks for your kindly review and comments.
To avoid making this thread too long, I will reply to all of your comments
(#1~#13) in this email.

> 1. terminology
> 
> In your patch a new worker "apply background worker" has been introduced,
> but I thought it might be confused because PostgreSQL has already the worker
> "background worker".
> Both of apply worker and apply bworker are categolized as bgworker.
> Do you have any reasons not to use "apply parallel worker" or "apply streaming
> worker"?
> (Note that I'm not native English speaker)

Since we will later consider applying non-streamed transactions in parallel, I
think "apply streaming worker" might not be very suitable. I think PostgreSQL
also has the worker "parallel worker", so for "apply parallel worker" and
"apply background worker", I feel that "apply background worker" will make the
relationship between workers more clear. ("[main] apply worker" and "apply
background worker")

> 2. logicalrep_worker_stop()
> 
> ```
> -       /* No worker, nothing to do. */
> -       if (!worker)
> -       {
> -               LWLockRelease(LogicalRepWorkerLock);
> -               return;
> -       }
> +       if (worker)
> +               logicalrep_worker_stop_internal(worker);
> +
> +       LWLockRelease(LogicalRepWorkerLock);
> +}
> ```
> 
> I thought you could add a comment the meaning of if-statement, like "No main
> apply worker, nothing to do"

Since the processing in the if statement is reversed from before, I added the
following comment based on your suggestion:
```
Found the main worker, then try to stop it.
```

> 3. logicalrep_workers_find()
> 
> I thought you could add a description about difference between this and
> logicalrep_worker_find() at the top of the function.
> IIUC logicalrep_workers_find() counts subworker, but logicalrep_worker_find()
> does not focus such type of workers.

I think it is fine to keep the comment because the comment says "returns list
of *all workers* for the subscription".
Also, we have added the comment "We are only interested in the main apply
worker or table sync worker here" in the function logicalrep_worker_find.

> 5. applybgworker.c
> 
> ```
> +/* Apply background workers hash table (initialized on first use) */
> +static HTAB *ApplyWorkersHash = NULL;
> +static List *ApplyWorkersFreeList = NIL;
> +static List *ApplyWorkersList = NIL;
> ```
> 
> I thought they should be ApplyBgWorkersXXX, because they stores information
> only related with apply bgworkers.

I improved them to ApplyBgworkersXXX just for the consistency with other names.

> 6. ApplyBgworkerShared
> 
> ```
> +       TransactionId   stream_xid;
> +       uint32  n;      /* id of apply background worker */
> +} ApplyBgworkerShared;
> ```
> 
> I thought the field "n" is too general, how about "proc_id" or "worker_id"?

I think "worker_id" seems better, so I improved "n" to "worker_id".

> 10. wait_event.h
> 
> ```
>         WAIT_EVENT_HASH_GROW_BUCKETS_REINSERT,
> +       WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_WORKER_STATE_CHANGE,
>         WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_SYNC_DATA,
> ```
> 
> I thought the event should be
> WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_BG_WORKER_STATE_CHANGE,
> because this is used when apply worker waits until the status of bgworker
> changes.

I improved them to "WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_BGWORKER_STATE_CHANGE" just for
the consistency with other names.

> 13. 015_stream.pl
> 
> I could not find test about TRUNCATE. IIUC apply bgworker works well
> even if it gets LOGICAL_REP_MSG_TRUNCATE message from main worker.
> Can you add the case?

I modified the test cases in "032_streaming_apply.pl" this time, the use case
you mentioned is covered now.

The rest of the comments are improved as suggested.
The new patches were attached in [1].

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS3PR01MB6275D64BE7726B0221B15F389E9F9%40OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com

Regards,
Wang wei

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Fix invalid memory access during the shutdown of the parallel apply worker.

  2. Fix assertion failure in apply worker.

  3. Use elog to report unexpected action in handle_streamed_transaction().

  4. Use appropriate wait event when sending data in the apply worker.

  5. Allow the logical_replication_mode to be used on the subscriber.

  6. Rename GUC logical_decoding_mode to logical_replication_mode.

  7. Display the leader apply worker's PID for parallel apply workers.

  8. Improve the code to decide and process the apply action.

  9. Document the newly added wait events added by commit 216a784829.

  10. Perform apply of large transactions by parallel workers.

  11. Wake up a subscription's replication worker processes after DDL.

  12. Add copyright notices to meson files

  13. Better document logical replication parameters

  14. Add a common function to generate the origin name.

  15. Harmonize parameter names in storage and AM code.

  16. Avoid using list_length() to test for empty list.

  17. Improve two comments related to a boolean DefElem's value

  18. Fix partition table's REPLICA IDENTITY checking on the subscriber.

  19. Fix data inconsistency between publisher and subscriber.

  20. Fix cache look-up failures while applying changes in logical replication.