From: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "movead(dot)li" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes. |
Date: | 2021-02-18 02:51:59 |
Message-ID: | CAPmGK1425Phh0VDFNuU1sANF=OAtrzk4noDPtNXJdip1Wnh_pA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 9:31 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Please find attached an updated patch.
I noticed that this doesn’t work for cases where ForeignScans are
executed inside functions, and I don’t have any simple solution for
that. So I’m getting back to what Horiguchi-san proposed for
postgres_fdw to handle concurrent fetches from a remote server
performed by multiple ForeignScan nodes that use the same connection.
As discussed before, we would need to create a scheduler for
performing such fetches in a more optimized way to avoid a performance
degradation in some cases, but that wouldn’t be easy. Instead, how
about reducing concurrency as an alternative? In his proposal,
postgres_fdw was modified to perform prefetching pretty aggressively,
so I mean removing aggressive prefetching. I think we could add it to
postgres_fdw later maybe as the server/table options. Sorry for the
back and forth.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | japin | 2021-02-18 02:55:25 | Re: Fix typo about WalSndPrepareWrite |
Previous Message | japin | 2021-02-18 02:31:14 | Re: Support ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... ADD/DROP PUBLICATION ... syntax |