| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jingtang Zhang <mrdrivingduck(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Use WALReadFromBuffers in more places |
| Date: | 2025-09-24 18:27:43 |
| Message-ID: | 783426a05a756b29b5b1ef4d5640f22d999fdec8.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2025-09-24 at 07:26 -0700, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Right. Reading unflushed WAL buffers for replication was one of the
> motivations. But, in general, WALReadFromBuffers has more benefits
> since it lets WAL buffers act as a cache for reads, avoiding the need
> to re-read WAL from disk for (both physical and logical) replication.
> For example, it makes the use of direct I/O for WAL more realistic
> and
> can provide significant performance benefits [1].
Is it possible to do a POC that shows the potential benefit, or are we
still too far away?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2025-09-24 18:35:49 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2025-09-24 18:26:45 | Re: Invalid primary_slot_name triggers warnings in all processes on reload |