| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Measuring replay lag |
| Date: | 2017-03-23 21:39:24 |
| Message-ID: | CAEepm=29+7DAzmsy1bC6cSbNibjYyKX9dq7zDOVG0AyObz5yYw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Second thoughts... I'll just make LagTrackerWrite externally
>> available, so a plugin can send anything it wants to the tracker.
>> Which means I'm explicitly removing the "logical replication support"
>> from this patch.
>
> Done.
>
> Here's the patch I'm looking to commit, with some docs and minor code
> changes as discussed.
Thank you for committing this. Time-based replication lag tracking
seems to be a regular topic on mailing lists and IRC, so I hope that
this will provide what people are looking for and not simply replace
that discussion with a new discussion about what lag really means :-)
Many thanks to Simon and Fujii-san for convincing me to move the
buffer to the sender (which now seems so obviously better), to
Fujii-san for the idea of tracking write and flush lag too, and to
Abhijit, Sawada-san, Ian, Craig and Robert for valuable feedback.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-03-23 21:40:55 | Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4 |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-03-23 20:58:47 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |