| From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Sergey Belyashov' <sergey(dot)belyashov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: BUG #19041: Logical replication locks wal processing |
| Date: | 2025-09-05 02:28:45 |
| Message-ID: | OSCPR01MB14966D4A18673FB3D481ED5E8F503A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Dear Sergey,
> Thank you for your explanation. It is what I'm about.
> Is it possible to optimize something to prevent decoding the whole WAL
> if there are no affected tables there?
I recalled there was a proposal which skips decoding changes for unpublished
tables, but it was withdrawn [1]. One of reasons was that a new transaction must
be started to check whether the table must be published or not, thus the
performance can be degraded in some cases.
I have also considered Dilip's idea [2] once, but it needs some architectural
changes. I cannot find on-going thread neither.
[1]: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5585/
[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFiTN-uwgQ%3DHVFRdz2%3DJUVgQHCPubatKrK14xD-0Ov71HRpbTQ%40mail.gmail.com
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2025-09-05 04:00:00 | Re: BUG #19037: Planner fails on estimating array length with "no relation entry" error |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-09-04 15:24:58 | Re: BUG #19034: Recursive function with sql_body can replace an existing function but can not be created on it's own |