| From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com |
| Cc: | smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com, shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, euler(at)eulerto(dot)com, m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) |
| Date: | 2023-01-24 03:05:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20230124.120530.2135381706312774067.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Sorry, I forgot to write one comment.
At Tue, 24 Jan 2023 11:45:35 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
+ /* Should we delay the current transaction? */
+ if (finish_ts)
+ maybe_delay_apply(xid, finish_ts);
+
if (!am_parallel_apply_worker())
maybe_start_skipping_changes(lsn);
It may not give actual advantages, but isn't it better that delay
happens after skipping?
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2023-01-24 03:22:18 | Re: Decoupling antiwraparound autovacuum from special rules around auto cancellation |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-24 02:58:17 | Re: libpqrcv_connect() leaks PGconn |