| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Report bytes and transactions actually sent downtream |
| Date: | 2026-03-17 05:02:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LWHAziEv1vYDJZcqR+=zXyyfF2daUCL72bYJkpzCjf4g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 4:51 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> The trick with this patch is to make sure that all the relevant places
> where data is sent downstream are correctly incremented.
>
Right.
> As far as I
> can see, things seem to be covered, but I cannot help but wonder if we
> are missing one or more places. @Amit, do you feel a hole somewhere?
>
Yesterday, I raised a point related to this which is whether we want
to count messages like keep_alive, copy_done, or
PqReplMsg_PrimaryStatusUpdate? These don't contain the user decoded
data from WAL but some additional information between
publisher-subscriber required to ensure data is being applied.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-03-17 05:06:08 | Re: pg_plan_advice |
| Previous Message | SungJun Jang | 2026-03-17 04:59:24 | Re: Row pattern recognition |