From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrice Chapuis <fabrice636861(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Logical replication timeout problem |
Date: | 2023-01-24 00:28:28 |
Message-ID: | CAHut+PvEakS8EQoZfVcS=wjLQHLn_WodT3dfqAAdQXwwXOfQTw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Hou-san, Here are my review comments for v5-0001.
======
src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
1.
@@ -2446,6 +2452,23 @@ ReorderBufferProcessTXN(ReorderBuffer *rb,
ReorderBufferTXN *txn,
elog(ERROR, "tuplecid value in changequeue");
break;
}
+
+ /*
+ * Sending keepalive messages after every change has some overhead, but
+ * testing showed there is no noticeable overhead if keepalive is only
+ * sent after every ~100 changes.
+ */
+#define CHANGES_THRESHOLD 100
+
+ /*
+ * Try to send a keepalive message after every CHANGES_THRESHOLD
+ * changes.
+ */
+ if (++changes_count >= CHANGES_THRESHOLD)
+ {
+ rb->update_progress_txn(rb, txn, change);
+ changes_count = 0;
+ }
I noticed you put the #define adjacent to the only usage of it,
instead of with the other variable declaration like it was before.
Probably it is better how you have done it, but:
1a.
The comment indentation is incorrect.
~
1b.
Since the #define is adjacent to its only usage IMO now the 2nd
comment is redundant. So the code can just say
/*
* Sending keepalive messages after every change has some
overhead, but
* testing showed there is no noticeable overhead if
keepalive is only
* sent after every ~100 changes.
*/
#define CHANGES_THRESHOLD 100
if (++changes_count >= CHANGES_THRESHOLD)
{
rb->update_progress_txn(rb, txn, change);
changes_count = 0;
}
------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-24 00:36:22 | Re: Cygwin cleanup |
Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2023-01-24 00:26:16 | Re: Monotonic WindowFunc support for ntile(), percent_rank() and cume_dist() |