| From: | Weiping Qu <qu(at)informatik(dot)uni-kl(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Question regarding logical replication |
| Date: | 2017-10-27 10:04:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1ef3248f-17f1-4b8d-94a0-72a3b712b03e@informatik.uni-kl.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
That's a good point and we haven't accounted for disk caching.
Is there any way to confirm this fact in PostgreSQL?
Weiping
On 27.10.2017 11:53, Francisco Olarte wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Weiping Qu <qu(at)informatik(dot)uni-kl(dot)de> wrote:
>
>> However, the plots showed different trend (currently I don't have plots on
>> my laptop) which shows that the more frequently are the CDC processes
>> reading from logical slots, the less overhead is incurred over PostgreSQL,
>> which leads to higher throughput.
> Have you accounted for disk caching? Your CDC may be getting log from
> the cache when going with little lag but being forced to read from
> disk (make the server do it ) when it falls behind.
>
> Francisco Olarte.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-10-27 11:31:09 | Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10 manual breaks links with anchors |
| Previous Message | Francisco Olarte | 2017-10-27 09:53:53 | Re: Question regarding logical replication |