public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
To: shveta malik <[email protected]>
Cc: SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Patch]: Fix excessive ProcArrayLock acquisitions with subscription max_retention_duration=0
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 16:28:29 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA4eK1JutLSx2dAa7hFSmZxxqgWsAjk8GCwy4h85o9WEit3bpw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJpy0uD8nmRCbhH1KBnb9Ch9SyxZh4OdeBaShBOkPKJM5A8Ujg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHg+QDdKVnCLHot=AcoPpEiSyDzGz7wGYjAFHVOw57oDtmUDWQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJpy0uDGM8eVqMORHKw61mm24AjH7jPZAhUaN3YeJrZ1bdpQFQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHg+QDfQEX5b=4MB=67WgPrF4t8gyUMWyFp7-hFe=EAFW-qALA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJpy0uD8nmRCbhH1KBnb9Ch9SyxZh4OdeBaShBOkPKJM5A8Ujg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 9:38 AM shveta malik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 10:32 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 2:48 AM shveta malik <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 2:11 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi Hackers,
> >> >
> >> > When a subscription has retain_dead_tuples enabled with maxretention set
> >> > to zero (unlimited retention), adjust_xid_advance_interval() caps
> >> > xid_advance_interval to Min(interval, maxretention). Since maxretention
> >> > is zero, this always collapses the interval to zero milliseconds.
> >> >
> >> > A zero makes TimestampDifferenceExceeds(last_time, now, 0) always
> >> > true in get_candidate_xid(). This causes the apply worker to call
> >> > GetOldestActiveTransactionId() on every single WAL message. This results in
> >> > a huge number of ProcArrayLock acquisitions under moderate write load.
> >> >
> >> > Fix by adding a maxretention > 0 guard to the cap. When maxretention is zero ,
> >> > the exponential back-off in adjust_xid_advance_interval()
> >> > now works correctly, growing the interval from 100 ms toward the 180 s
> >> > ceiling.
> >> >
> >> > Measured with perf uprobe counting GetOldestActiveTransactionId calls
> >> > at ~39K TPS (pgbench, 5 clients):
> >> >
> >> > Before fix: 25,104 calls / 5 s (~5,021/s)
> >> > After fix: 31 calls / 5 s (~6/s)
> >> >
> >>
> >> Thanks for reporting it. I am reveiwing the problem sattement.
> >> Meanwhile can you please look at it, I am getting the following error
> >> while applying the patch on my Ubuntu setup (git am):
> >>
> >> error: corrupt patch at line 22
> >
> >
> > Thanks! Please find the updated v2 patch.
>
> Thanks. The patch looks good.
>
LGTM as well, so pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
view thread (7+ messages)
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]
Subject: Re: [Patch]: Fix excessive ProcArrayLock acquisitions with subscription max_retention_duration=0
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1JutLSx2dAa7hFSmZxxqgWsAjk8GCwy4h85o9WEit3bpw@mail.gmail.com>
* 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