From: | Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Apply |
Date: | 2025-08-12 06:34:46 |
Message-ID: | 73ace9a5-404e-4563-b3b1-eba9b4b91c60@gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/8/2025 06:45, Amit Kapila wrote:
> The core idea is that the leader apply worker ensures the following:
> a. Identifies dependencies between transactions. b. Coordinates
> parallel workers to apply independent transactions concurrently. c.
> Ensures correct ordering for dependent transactions.
Dependency detection may be quite an expensive operation. What about a
'positive' approach - deadlock detection on replica and, restart apply
of a record that should be applied later? Have you thought about this
way? What are the pros and cons here? Do you envision common cases where
such a deadlock will be frequent?
--
regards, Andrei Lepikhov
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jian he | 2025-08-12 06:37:10 | Re: implement CAST(expr AS type FORMAT 'template') |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-08-12 06:30:43 | Re: Making type Datum be 8 bytes everywhere |