From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval |
Date: | 2017-04-17 02:40:28 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoBv9bXS7cRn_jpH5YjbLjiaTZ8K+tsdMzgP8fgZjvWVfQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Petr Jelinek
<petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 14/04/17 14:30, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Petr Jelinek
>> <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I am not quite sure adding more GUCs is all that great option. When
>>> writing the patches I was wondering if we should perhaps rename the
>>> wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_interval to something that
>>> makes more sense for both physical and logical replication though.
>>
>> It seems to me that you should really have a different GUC,
>> wal_retrieve_retry_interval has been designed to work in the startup
>> process, and I think that it should still only behave as originally
>> designed.
>
> Ah yeah I am actually confusing it with wal_receiver_timeout which
> behaves same for wal_receiver and subscription worker. So yeah it makes
> sense to have separate GUC
Attached two patches add new GUCs apply_worker_timeout and
apply_worker_launch_interval which are used instead of
wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_timeout. These new
parameters are not settable at worker-level so far.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Add-a-GUC-parameter-apply_worker_timeout.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.7 KB |
0002-Add-a-new-GUC-parameter-apply_worker_launch_interval.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-04-17 03:00:50 | Re: Logical replication and inheritance |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2017-04-17 02:04:04 | Re: snapbuild woes |