public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rahila Syed <[email protected]>
To: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Use WALReadFromBuffers in more places
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:31:29 +0530
Message-ID: <CAH2L28uvqq_WxZqFJYXUxqZzXmfDC6gP9uYLQXmYMtFq+7Jm_A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CALj2ACVfF2Uj9NoFy-5m98HNtjHpuD17EDE9twVeJng-jTAe7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPsk3_CzLbMe-D07H5Vo6yWFvyXHh5is7AoPUCFcztrUmf1haw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACVzL4uU=hxFpSfkqP4HeFCPucbBTEg6HNf_MPTYm52pHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMm1aWYa1fGKcuG69xGJPNXLQ_9zHrPqhr-ZGdj4so6Exq66MQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACXa-2eEHHaNRwjcF1k9rtH=EJrWvbGJkucdSOD3zP-OUw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPsk3_A7079UtVqm2WXXiwadGJ7DucpenmLwnXZgDgXee703Rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACX+LKR7=3TkP83_9cdcXZd+9zhXWokjXyh5tTSi25+ogw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 8:56 PM Jeff Davis <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 2025-09-13 at 22:04 -0700, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > Thanks for looking at this. Yes, the WAL writers can zero out flushed
> > buffers before WALReadFromBuffers gets to them. However,
> > WALReadFromBuffers was intentionally designed as an opportunistic
> > optimization - it's a "try this first, quickly" approach before
> > falling back to reading from WAL files.
>
> IIRC, one motivation (perhaps the primary motivation?) was to make it
> possible to read buffers before they are flushed. It was always
> possible to read already-flushed buffers.
>
The benefit of reading unflushed buffers is that we can replicate the
> WAL sooner (though it can't be replayed until the primary flushes it).
> Is that right?
>

 I'm not certain about the primary motivation, but as it stands,
WALReadFromBuffers only reads WAL records present in buffers up to the
flush pointer. This is because XLogSendPhysical currently sends records
only up to the flush pointer, not beyond.

I am currently testing a patch developed by Melih Mutlu that implements the
functionality you described, sending unflushed buffers during physical
replication. After some tuning, the patch has shown a 5 percent improvement
in TPS for synchronous replication with remote_write. I am working on
further improving the patch before sharing it on the hackers mailing list.

Thank you,
Rahila Syed


view thread (12+ 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]
  Subject: Re: Use WALReadFromBuffers in more places
  In-Reply-To: <CAH2L28uvqq_WxZqFJYXUxqZzXmfDC6gP9uYLQXmYMtFq+7Jm_A@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