Re: Optimization for hot standby XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK redo

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: 邱宇航 <iamqyh(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimization for hot standby XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK redo
Date: 2020-04-30 11:12:02
Message-ID: CAA4eK1JKAQxo1suRy6tTRjWTW=+yMpg5z7cR-7wtLAvGzYKHYg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:07 PM 邱宇航 <iamqyh(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I noticed that in hot standby, XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK redo is sometimes block by another query, and all the rest redo is blocked by this lock getting operation, which is not good and often happed in my database, so the hot standby will be left behind and master will store a lot of WAL which can’t be purged.
>
> So here is the idea:
> We can do XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK redo asynchronously, and the rest redo will continue.
>

Hmm, I don't think we can do this. The XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK WAL is used
for AccessExclusiveLock on a Relation which means it is a lock for a
DDL operation. If you skip processing the WAL for this lock, the
behavior of queries running on standby will be unpredictable.
Consider a case where on the master, the user has dropped the table
<t1> and when it will replay such an operation on standby the
concurrent queries on t1 will be blocked due to replay of
XLOG_STANDBY_LOCK WAL and if you skip that WAL, the drop of table and
query on the same table can happen simultaneously leading to
unpredictable behavior.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-04-30 11:43:23 Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2020-04-30 10:45:13 Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup