Re: Logical replication keepalive flood

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: Logical replication keepalive flood
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1+0j9xL=GWHPdKOmKD5hith2RQ_PmzvgD=-4Jgu-2LkeA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Logical replication keepalive flood  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Logical replication keepalive flood  (Abbas Butt <abbas.butt@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 1:47 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Wed, 9 Jun 2021 11:21:55 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote in
> > The issue - if actually it is - we send a keep-alive packet before a
> > quite short sleep.
> >
> > We really want to send it if the sleep gets long but we cannot predict
> > that before entering a sleep.
> >
> > Let me think a little more on this..
>
> After some investigation, I find out that the keepalives are sent
> almost always after XLogSendLogical requests for the *next* record.
>

Does these keepalive messages are sent at the same frequency even for
subscribers? Basically, I wanted to check if we have logical
replication set up between 2 nodes then do we send these keep-alive
messages flood? If not, then why is it different in the case of
pg_recvlogical? Is it possible that the write/flush location is not
updated at the pace at which we expect? Please see commit 41d5f8ad73
which seems to be talking about a similar problem.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Duplicate history file?
Следующее
От: Dilip Kumar
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Race condition in recovery?