Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration
Date: 2010-02-26 21:19:39
Message-ID: 5108.1267219179@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Why shouldn't it have any queries at walreceiver startup? It has any
> xlog segments that were copied from the master and any it can find in
> the archive, it could easily reach a consistent point long before it
> needs to connect to the master. If you really want to protect your
> master from any additional overhead you don't currently need to
> configure a streaming connection at all, you can just use the file
> shipping interface.

There's *definitely* not going to be enough information in the WAL
stream coming from a master that doesn't think it has HS slaves.
We can't afford to record all that extra stuff in installations for
which it's just useless overhead.  BTW, has anyone made any attempt
to measure the performance hit that the patch in its current form is
creating via added WAL entries?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-02-26 21:22:15
Subject: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration
Previous:From: Greg StarkDate: 2010-02-26 21:11:32
Subject: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group