Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JRwzq0fXd88bO=P8NRQcrTWCiZK1JEoxGw1Fn5CrTLLQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 11:31 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:55 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > You are right.  I have changed it.
> >
>
> Thanks, I have pushed the second patch in this series which is
> 0001-WAL-Log-invalidations-at-command-end-with-wal_le in your latest
> patch.  I will continue working on remaining patches.
>

I have reviewed and made a number of changes in the next patch which
extends the logical decoding output plugin API with stream methods.
(v41-0001-Extend-the-logical-decoding-output-plugin-API-wi).

1. I think we need handling of include_xids and include_timestamp but
not skip_empty_xacts in the new APIs, as of now, none of the options
were respected.  We need 'include_xids' handling because we need to
include xid with stream messages and similarly 'include_timestamp' for
stream commit messages.  OTOH, I think we never use streaming mode for
empty xacts, so we don't need to bother about skip_empty_xacts in
streaming APIs.
2. Then I made a number of changes in documentation, comments, and
other cosmetic changes.

Kindly review/test and let me know if you see any problems with the
above changes.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Issue with cancel_before_shmem_exit while searching to remove a particular registered exit callbacks
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: INSERT INTO SELECT, Why Parallelism is not selected?