Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JPxAX3__Cy-oD+bH3arYU0Jdn_ihRPJOF8hdjWChfKWQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)  ("Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 4:56 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
<osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 10, 2023 2:05 PM Friday, February 10, 2023 2:05 PM wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 10:11 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> In the previous patch, we couldn't solve the
> timeout of the publisher, when we conduct a scenario suggested by Horiguchi-san
> and reproduced in the scenario attached test file 'test.sh'.
> But now we handle it by adjusting the timing of the first wait time.
>
> FYI, we thought to implement the new variable 'send_time'
> in the LogicalRepWorker structure at first. But, this structure
> is used when launcher controls workers or reports statistics
> and it stores TimestampTz recorded in the received WAL,
> so not sure if the struct is the right place to implement the variable.
> Moreover, there are other similar variables such as last_recv_time
> or reply_time. So, those will be confusing when we decide to have
> new variable together. Then, it's declared separately.
>

I think we can introduce a new variable as last_feedback_time in the
LogicalRepWorker structure and probably for the last_received, we can
last_lsn in MyLogicalRepWorker as that seems to be updated correctly.
I think it would be good to avoid global variables.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Richard Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: Killing off removed rels properly
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Rework of collation code, extensibility