Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Subject | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20200303214646.6adway2z5wnapjem@development Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions
Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions |
List | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, I started looking at this patch series again, hoping to get it moving for PG13. There's been a tremendous amount of work done since I last worked on it, and a lot was discussed on this thread, so it'll take a while to get familiar with the new code ... The first thing I realized that WAL-logging of assignments in v12 does both the "old" logging (using dedicated message) and "new" with toplevel-XID embedded in the first message. Yes, the patch was wrong, because it eliminated all calls to ProcArrayApplyXidAssignment() and so it was trivial to crash the replica due to KnownAssignedXids overflow. But I don't think re-introducing XLOG_XACT_ASSIGNMENT message is the right fix. I actually proposed doing this (having both ways to log assignments) so that there's no regression risk with (wal_level < logical). But IIRC Andres objected to it, argumenting that we should not log the same piece of information in two very different ways at the same time (IIRC it was discussed on the FOSDEM dev meeting, so I don't have a link to share). And I do agree with him ... The question is, why couldn't the replica use the same assignment info we already write for logical decoding? The main challenge is that now the assignment can be sent in many different xlog messages, from a bunch of resource managers (essentially, any xlog message with a xid can have embedded XID of the toplevel xact). So the handling would either need to happen in every rmgr, or we need to move it before we call the rmgr. For exampple, we might do this e.g. in StartupXLOG() I think, per the attached patch (FWIW this particular fix was written by Masahiko Sawada, not me). This does the trick for me - I'm no longer able to reproduce the KnownAssignedXids overflow. The one difference is that we used to call ProcArrayApplyXidAssignment for larger groups of XIDs, as sent in the assignment message. Now we call it for each individual assignment. I don't know if this is an issue, but I suppose we might introduce some sort of local caching (accumulate the assignments into a local array, call the function only when we have enough of them). Aside from that, I think there's a minor bug in xact.c - the patch adds a "assigned" field to TransactionStateData, but then it fails to add a default value into TopTransactionStateData. We probably interpret NULL as false, but then there's nothing for the pointer. I suspect it might leave some random garbage there, leading to strange things later. Another thing I noticed is LogicalDecodingProcessRecord() extracts the toplevel XID using a macro txid = XLogRecGetTopXid(record); but then it just starts accessing the fields directly again in the ReorderBufferAssignChild call. I think we should do this instead: ReorderBufferAssignChild(ctx->reorder, txid, XLogRecGetXid(record), buf.origptr); regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
pgsql-hackers by date: