From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
Date: | 2025-05-20 11:41:06 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+VNaGi-GU6awgFKmTgidLTHo2HDuzV1+aT8sjn8QtPxg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 5:01 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
Please find some more comments on the 0001 patch:
1.
We need to know about such transactions
+ * for conflict detection and resolution in logical replication. See
+ * GetOldestTransactionIdInCommit and its use.
Do we need to mention resolution in the above sentence? This patch is
all about detecting conflict reliably.
2. In wait_for_publisher_status(), we use remote_epoch,
remote_nextxid, and remote_oldestxid to compute full transaction id's.
Why can't we send FullTransactionIds for remote_oldestxid and
remote_nextxid from publisher? If these are required, maybe a comment
somewhere for that would be good.
3.
/*
+ * Note it is important to set committs value after marking ourselves as
+ * in the commit critical section (DELAY_CHKPT_IN_COMMIT). This is because
+ * we want to ensure all such transactions are finished before we allow
+ * the logical replication client to advance its xid which is used to hold
+ * back dead rows for conflict detection. See
+ * maybe_advance_nonremovable_xid.
+ */
+ committs = GetCurrentTimestamp();
How does setting committs after setting DELAY_CHKPT_IN_COMMIT help in
advancing client-side xid? IIUC, on client-side, we simply wait for
such an xid to be finished based on the remote_oldestxid and
remote_nextxid sent via the server. So, the above comment is not
completely clear to me. I have updated this and related comments in
the attached diff patch to make it clear. See if that makes sense to
you.
4.
In 0001's commit message, we have: "Furthermore, the preserved commit
timestamps and origin data are essential for
consistently detecting update_origin_differs conflicts." But it is not
clarified how this patch helps in consistently detecting
update_origin_differs conflict?
5. I have tried to add some more details in comments on why
oldest_nonremovable_xid needs to be FullTransactionId. See attached.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v30_0001_amit.1.patch.txt | text/plain | 3.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-05-20 12:01:47 | Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed |
Previous Message | Sami Imseih | 2025-05-20 11:34:39 | Re: Regression in statement locations |