Tom Lane wrote:
> Christophe Pettus <xof@thebuild.com> writes:
> > The problem indeed appear to be a very large number of subtransactions, each one creating a temp table, inside a
singletransaction. It's made worse by one of those transactions finally getting replayed on the secondary, only to
haveanother one come in right behind it...
>
> Hmm, I tried to reproduce this and could not. I experimented with
> various permutations of this:
This problem is probably related to commit 9b013dc238c, which AFAICS is
only in pg10, not 9.5.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general