From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: sequences vs. synchronous replication
In-reply-to: <8231183d-1077-5394-1ffa-0c9d8c3905b0@enterprisedb.com>
References: <712cad46-a9c8-1389-aef8-faf0203c9be9@enterprisedb.com>
 <1452362.1639803168@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <38a6a779-ee8d-de3c-fbd7-709285be88fa@enterprisedb.com>
 <7869761b-fdc7-6f7d-dc95-9ba8315a8ecf@enterprisedb.com>
 <1637476.1639862832@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <8e24a470-b092-3c9f-0614-acd9df3f724f@enterprisedb.com>
 <f4dd81e9-fc9e-3b71-0a8a-4a5ae345331d@enterprisedb.com>
 <a5303964-717e-9cb0-52cf-7a4b7d16adc8@enterprisedb.com>
 <8231183d-1077-5394-1ffa-0c9d8c3905b0@enterprisedb.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
	message dated "Tue, 21 Dec 2021 01:53:02 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2683972.1640048519.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:01:59 -0500
Message-ID: <2683973.1640048519@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2683973.1640048519%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> OK, I did a quick test with two very simple benchmarks - simple select 
> from a sequence, and 'pgbench -N' on scale 1. Benchmark was on current 
> master, patched means SEQ_LOG_VALS was set to 1.

But ... pgbench -N doesn't use sequences at all, does it?

Probably inserts into a table with a serial column would constitute a
plausible real-world case.

			regards, tom lane