| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrice Chapuis <fabrice636861(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rework LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress |
| Date: | 2023-02-13 02:52:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LKxS6p=RQdHZSxTgO_r=kwRcQ0SEz6orMZUW06ZzRkww@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 3:04 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> > One difference I see with the patch is that I think we will end up
> > sending keepalive for empty prepared transactions even though we don't
> > skip sending begin/prepare messages for those.
>
> With the proposed approach we reliably know whether a callback wrote
> something, so we can tune the behaviour here fairly easily.
>
I would like to clarify a few things about the proposed approach. In
commit_cb_wrapper()/prepare_cb_wrapper(), the patch first did
ctx->did_write = false;, then call the commit/prepare callback (which
will call pgoutput_commit_txn()/pgoutput_prepare_txn()) and then call
update_progress() which will make decisions based on ctx->did_write
flag. Now, for this to work pgoutput_commit_txn/pgoutput_prepare_txn
should know that the transaction has performed some writes before that
call which is currently working because pgoutput is tracking the same
via sent_begin_txn. Is the intention here that we still track whether
BEGIN () has been sent via pgoutput?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-02-13 02:57:01 | Re: Exit walsender before confirming remote flush in logical replication |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2023-02-13 02:27:58 | Re: Fix GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL test scenario in 003_check_guc.pl |