Re: WAL insert delay settings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject Re: WAL insert delay settings
Date
Msg-id 1a3f3ee5-eb78-ca83-96ec-26b9eeb138f0@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL insert delay settings  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: WAL insert delay settings  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 2/13/19 4:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> Bulk operations like CREATE INDEX, ALTER TABLE, or bulk loads can create
>> a lot of WAL.  A lot of WAL at once can cause delays in replication.
> 
> Agreed, though I think VACUUM should certainly be included in this.
> 

Won't these two throttling criteria interact in undesirable and/or
unpredictable way? With the regular vacuum throttling (based on
hit/miss/dirty) it's possible to compute rough read/write I/O limits.
But with the additional sleeps based on amount-of-WAL, we may sleep for
one of two reasons, so we may not reach either limit. No?

> I'm all for the idea though it seems like a different approach is needed
> based on the down-thread discussion.  Ultimately, having a way to have
> these activities happen without causing issues for replicas is a great
> idea and would definitely address a practical issue that a lot of people
> run into.
> 

+1


-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL insert delay settings
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL insert delay settings