Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

From: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
Date: 2019-11-04 10:05:12
Message-ID: CAGz5QCKwfgGnuzzJ3wRi=4Afpgen4Ar7gJqJqEsSzDfM1+zrAw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:32 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> So your result shows that with "streaming on", performance is
> degrading? By any chance did you try to see where is the bottleneck?
>
Right. But, as we increase the logical_decoding_work_mem, the
performance improves. I've not analyzed the bottleneck yet. I'm
looking into the same.

--
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julien Rouhaud 2019-11-04 10:13:44 Re: Collation versioning
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2019-11-04 10:02:33 Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions