Re: [HACKERS] Interval for launching the table sync worker

On 4/13/17 18:09, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> It would have the
> disadvantage that if some tables were consistently failing, no other
> tables could get synchronized as the amount of workers is limited. OTOH
> the approach chosen in the patch will first try all tables and only then
> start rate limiting, not quite sure which is better.

I think the latter is better.

One of the scenarios cited originally somewhere was one table failing
because of an encoding issue.  So it's useful to allow other tables to
continue.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services