| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speedup of relation deletes during recovery |
| Date: | 2018-06-21 03:01:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAEepm=3c6oPJ-Lqi84r6Ob0GFFxCr+LWHbUDr-OnXx9UGo7vmg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:54 AM, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> wrote:
>>> We just had a customer hit this issue. I kind of wonder whether this
>>> shouldn't be backpatched: Currently the execution on the primary is
>>> O(NBuffers * log(ndrels)) whereas it's O(NBuffers * ndrels) on the
>>> standby - with a lot higher constants to boot. That means it's very
>>> easy to get into situations where the standy starts to lag behind very
>>> significantly.
>>
>> +1, we faced with that too
>
> +1 to back-patch. As Horiguchi-san pointed out, this is basically
> the fix for oversight of commit 279628a0a7, not new feature.
+1
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2018-06-21 03:24:11 | Re: PATCH: backtraces for error messages |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2018-06-21 02:12:54 | Re: Keeping temporary tables in shared buffers |