On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 11:49 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2024 at 10:30, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Michael and Robert,
> >
> > 20.04.2024 05:57, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 01:57:41PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > >> It looks to me like in the first run it took 3 minutes for the
> > >> replay_lsn to catch up to the desired value, and in the second run,
> > >> two seconds. I think I have seen previous instances where something
> > >> similar happened, although in those cases I did not stop to record any
> > >> details. Have others seen this? Is there something we can/should do
> > >> about it?
> > > FWIW, I've also seen delays as well with this test on a few occasions.
> > > Thanks for mentioning it.
> >
> > It reminds me of
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/858a7622-2c81-1687-d1df-1322dfcb2e72%40gmail.com
>
> Thanks Alexander for the test, I was able to reproduce the issue with
> the test you shared and also verify that the patch at [1] fixes the
> same.
>
One of the issues reported in the thread you referred to has the same
symptoms [1]. I'll review and analyze your proposal.
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/858a7622-2c81-1687-d1df-1322dfcb2e72%40gmail.com
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.