From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: AJG <ayden@gera.co.nz>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Trigger overhead/performance and alternatives?
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2018 09:47:47 +0200
Message-ID: <0ebffecc-6f25-0436-2a0b-f6049a5cb4a6@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1530437484973-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
References: <1530437484973-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
On 01.07.18 11:31, AJG wrote:
> Where is mentioned trigger overhead, and provided an alternative solution
> (logical replication slot monitoring).
>
> My 2 part question is.
>
> 1) Does anybody have any benchmarks re: trigger overhead/performance or have
> any experience to give a sort of indication, at all?
That really depends on a lot of things, how you write the triggers, what
they do, etc. You should probably measure that yourself.
> 2) Is anybody aware of any other clever alternatives, pg extensions or
> github code etc as an alternative to using triggers?
Maybe wal2json will give you a starting point.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, ayden@gera.co.nz
Subject: Re: Trigger overhead/performance and alternatives?
In-Reply-To: <0ebffecc-6f25-0436-2a0b-f6049a5cb4a6@2ndquadrant.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox