From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: read transaction and sync rep |
Date: | 2012-01-13 11:44:35 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKEM_=dpgt51Z0YoyCVqHsgAb0KbFT1nmhO_=Y=pzLoRQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I found that even read transaction waits for sync rep when it generates
> WAL records even if XID is not assigned. For example, imagine the case
> where SELECT query does a heap clean operation and generates
> XLOG_HEAP2_CLEAN record. ISTM that such a read transaction doesn't
> need to wait for sync rep because that's not visible to the client... Can
> we skip waiting for sync rep if XID is not assigned?
Your example of XLOG_HEAP2_CLEAN records is a good one but there are
other record types and circumstances, as described in the comment near
the top of RecordTransactionCommit
/*
* If we didn't create XLOG entries, we're done here; otherwise we
* should flush those entries the same as a commit record. (An
* example of a possible record that wouldn't cause an XID to be
* assigned is a sequence advance record due to nextval() --- we want
* to flush that to disk before reporting commit.)
*/
if (!wrote_xlog)
goto cleanup;
Perhaps there is a case to say that sequences don't need to be flushed
if all they did was do nextval but no change was associated with that,
I'm not sure.
So I think there is a case for optimisation using finer grained decision making.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-01-13 12:27:13 | Re: New replication mode: write |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-01-13 11:30:21 | read transaction and sync rep |