| From: | Nadav Shatz <nadav(at)tailorbrands(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgpool-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Recent mutated table tracking in memory |
| Date: | 2026-02-10 15:16:33 |
| Message-ID: | CACeKOO2QqpnML1OkQqqCCc+xG1d2M+sS7y7zE9vw5W-DXu+xKQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgpool-hackers |
Hi Tatsuo,
After reading more about disable_load_balance_on_write=dml_adaptive i came
to the thought that this feature is actually an "extension" of that since
it covers "global" and not just per transaction behavior. in any case i
think it makes more sense that it sits under
the disable_load_balance_on_write and not as a standalone for clarity.
I'm attaching below an updated patch with these adjustments.
Please let me know what you think.
On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 1:29 PM Nadav Shatz <nadav(at)tailorbrands(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Tatsuo,
>
> Thank you for all the great comments and questions! I took under
> consideration all of them either adding support/tests or detailing the
> limitations in the docs.
>
> Let me know what you think of the latest patch attached here
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 1:23 AM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>
>> From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> Subject: Re: Proposal: Recent mutated table tracking in memory
>> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 16:43:53 +0900 (JST)
>> Message-ID: <20260203(dot)164353(dot)362943818466117773(dot)ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>>
>> > Hi Nadav,
>> >
>> > Thank you for updating the patch!
>> >
>> >> Thank you for the comments!
>> >>
>> >> I agree with all of them. Let me know what you think of the changes
>> and new
>> >> naming.
>> >
>> > I still think "memory_map" is too generic. Anything put on memory for
>> > data mapping could be called "memory map". I recommend to change the
>> > name to more feature specific one: What about replacing "memory_map"
>> > with "track_table_mutation"? It's a little bit longer name but it
>> > clearly represents the feature. Any better ideas are welcome.
>> >
>> > - memory_map_enabled: Enable/disable the feature (default: off)
>> > - memory_map_ttl_factor: TTL multiplier for replication delay (default:
>> 5.0)
>> > - memory_map_cold_start_duration: Cold start period in ms (default:
>> 2000)
>> > - memory_map_table_buckets: Hash buckets for table map (default: 1024)
>> > - memory_map_table_size: Max tracked tables (default: 2048)
>> > - memory_map_query_buckets: Hash buckets for query cache (default: 2048)
>> > - memory_map_query_cache_size: Max cached queries (default: 10000)
>> >
>> > Also I feel memory_map_query_cache_size is confusing because there's
>> > already "query cache" feature in pgpool. Can we change it something
>> > like "query_parse_cache_size"?
>> >
>> > Review comments:
>> >
>> > (1) Why the regression test is 45? Shouldn't it be 42? (the last
>> > feature test is 041.external_replication_delay).
>> >
>> > (2) You enhance the patch to deal with leader watch changing. That's
>> > good. However, I don't see a test case for it in test.sh.
>> >
>> > (3) It seems the patch does not support TRUNCATE, MERGE, PREPARE and
>> > WITH + updating. If so, it should be noted in the docs as a limitation
>> > of the feature.
>>
>> (4) It seems the patch does not consider transactions. If an UPDATE is
>> performed in a transaction and the transaction gets rollbacked, load
>> balance is disabled despite that fact that the table modification did
>> not happen.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Tatsuo Ishii
>> SRA OSS K.K.
>> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
>> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>>
>
>
> --
> Nadav Shatz
> Tailor Brands | CTO
>
--
Nadav Shatz
Tailor Brands | CTO
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| table_track.patch | application/octet-stream | 96.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2026-02-11 10:28:45 | Re: Proposal: Recent mutated table tracking in memory |
| Previous Message | Nadav Shatz | 2026-02-06 11:29:10 | Re: Proposal: Recent mutated table tracking in memory |