Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 16:46:31 -0800
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
	Fujii Masao <fujii@postgresql.org>,
	Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
Message-ID: <20230206004631.GA277434@nathanxps13>
References: <20230201175806.GA3199959@nathanxps13>
 <20230201223555.GA3721373@nathanxps13>
 <Y9sam108o4mxZFiS@paquier.xyz>
 <20230204113029.xlcqrbxhp6lerrnc@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20230204180354.GA258107@nathanxps13>
 <Y979NR3U5VnWrTwB@paquier.xyz>
 <20230205221938.GA274245@nathanxps13>
 <20230205230157.45kl5gqryupzdoyb@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20230205235747.GA275913@nathanxps13>
 <20230206000750.ohqjmbfo3trtwvhc@alap3.anarazel.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230206000750.ohqjmbfo3trtwvhc@alap3.anarazel.de>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230206004631.GA277434%40nathanxps13>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 04:07:50PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-02-05 15:57:47 -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I agree that the shell overhead isn't the main performance issue,
>> but it's unclear to me how much of this should be baked into
>> PostgreSQL.
> 
> I don't know fully either. But just reimplementing all of it in
> different modules doesn't seem like a sane approach either. A lot of it
> is policy that we need to solve once, centrally.
> 
>> I mean, we could introduce a GUC that tells us how far ahead to
>> restore and have a background worker (or multiple background workers)
>> asynchronously pull files into a staging directory via the callbacks.
>> Is that the sort of scope you are envisioning?
> 
> Closer, at least.

Got it.  I suspect we'll want to do something similar for archive modules
eventually, too.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com