| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com" <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "euler(at)eulerto(dot)com" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, "m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com" <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br" <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com" <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) |
| Date: | 2022-12-27 06:44:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KbTakALB4H9hNWFno-BQwcdJ_cYbXBpMkuURTJcjhFzA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 11:42 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > BTW, the blocking problem with this patch is to deal with shutdown as
> > discussed in the thread [1].
>
> I will have a look.
>
Thanks!
> In short, the problem is that at
> > shutdown, we wait for walsender to send all pending data and ensure
> > all data is flushed in the remote node. But, if the other node is
> > waiting due to a time-delayed apply then shutdown won't be successful.
> > It would be really great if you can let us know your thoughts in the
> > thread [1] as that can help to move this work forward.
>
> Okay, so you mean to say that with logical the shutdown will be
> delayed until all the changes are applied on the subscriber but the
> same is not true for physical standby?
Right.
> Is it because on physical
> standby we flush the WAL before applying?
>
Yes, the walreceiver first flushes the WAL before applying.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-12-27 06:54:56 | Re: Allow placeholders in ALTER ROLE w/o superuser |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-12-27 06:43:24 | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |