Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off
Date: 2012-05-11 09:36:01
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJm3WWrf-7A-FeeyLJ9HvXGd9oxAG5tmcE8D97OYwxpiQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10 May 2012 20:51, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> I noticed that when synchronous_commit=off were not waking up the wal sender
> latch in xact.c:RecordTransactionCommit which leads to ugly delays of approx 7
> seconds (1 + replication_timeout/10) with default settings.
> Given that were flushing the wal to disk much sooner this appears to be a bad
> idea - especially as this may happen even under load if we ever reach the
> 'coughtup' state.

Sounds like a problem. I'll have a look.

> I wonder why the WalSndWakeup isn't done like:
>
> diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
> b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
> index ecb71b6..7a3224b 100644
> --- a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
> +++ b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
> @@ -1906,6 +1906,10 @@ XLogWrite(XLogwrtRqst WriteRqst, bool flexible, bool
> xlog_switch)
>            xlogctl->LogwrtRqst.Flush = LogwrtResult.Flush;
>        SpinLockRelease(&xlogctl->info_lck);
>    }
> +
> +   /* the walsender wasn't woken up in xact.c */
> +   if(max_wal_senders > 1 && synchronous_commit == SYNCHRONOUS_COMMIT_OFF)
> +       WalSndWakeup();
>  }
>
> Doing that for the synchronous_commit=off case can imo be considered a bugfix,
> but I wonder why we ever wake the senders somewhere else?
> The only argument I can see for doing it at places like StartTransactionCommit
> is that thats the place after which the data will be visible on the client. I
> think thats a non-argument though because if wal is flushed to disk outside of
> a commit there normally is enough data to make it worthwile.
>
> Doing the above results in a very noticeable reduction in lagginess and even a
> noticeable reduction in cpu-usage spikes on a busy replication test setup.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres
>
> --
>  Andres Freund                     http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
>  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2012-05-11 09:48:28 Re: "pgstat wait timeout" just got a lot more common on Windows
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2012-05-11 09:32:04 Re: Draft release notes complete