public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
To: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
Cc: Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 14:50:45 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1Lv8C+mtgp9e=CGZYM3ExN_9eN0u4aHsJcRbJPnjRWcwQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA4eK1LkZ+99rKhp1Nxhg9iGBppf1FgLEFmC5SntNFtc1xJFTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA4eK1+dsdB_g=Y9UnBf8GQk1VnHnugbPWp3Ebt1JXtETcQUgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<TY3PR01MB9889D457278B254CA87D1325F581A@TY3PR01MB9889.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<OS3PR01MB9882CCE9A9F037309078DC3DF587A@OS3PR01MB9882.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA4eK1Lv8C+mtgp9e=CGZYM3ExN_9eN0u4aHsJcRbJPnjRWcwQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/6/23 11:19, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 11:56 PM Tomas Vondra
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/3/23 18:52, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>
>> Another idea is that maybe we could somehow inform ReorderBuffer whether
>> the output plugin even is interested in sequences. That'd help with
>> cases where we don't even want/need to replicate sequences, e.g. because
>> the publication does not specify (publish=sequence).
>>
>> What happens now in that case is we call ReorderBufferQueueSequence(),
>> it does the whole dance with starting/aborting the transaction, calls
>> rb->sequence() which just does "meh" and doesn't do anything. Maybe we
>> could just short-circuit this by asking the output plugin somehow.
>>
>> In an extreme case the plugin may not even specify the sequence
>> callbacks, and we're still doing all of this.
>>
> 
> We could explore this but I guess it won't solve the problem we are
> facing in cases where all sequences are published and plugin has
> specified the sequence callbacks. I think it would add some overhead
> of this check in positive cases where we decide to anyway do send the
> changes.

Well, the idea is the check would be very simple (essentially just a
boolean flag somewhere), so not really measurable.

And if the plugin requests decoding sequences, I guess it's natural it
may have a bit of overhead. It needs to do more things, after all. It
needs to be acceptable, ofc.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

view thread (45+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox