| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |
| Date: | 2020-06-12 11:04:52 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JV37jXUT5LeWzkBDNNnSntwQbLUZAj6m82QMiR1ZuuHQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:38 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> - Currently, while reading/writing the streaming/subxact files we are
> reporting the wait event for example
> 'pgstat_report_wait_start(WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_SUBXACT_WRITE);', but
> BufFileWrite/BufFileRead internally reports the read/write wait event.
> So I think we can avoid reporting that?
>
Yes, we can avoid that. No other place using BufFileRead does any
such reporting.
> Basically, this part is still
> I have to work upon, once we get the consensus then I can remove those
> extra wait event from the patch.
>
Okay, feel free to send an updated patch with the above change.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Sharma | 2020-06-12 11:27:40 | Re: Parallel copy |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-06-12 10:24:37 | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |