On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 12:30 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 11:29 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> But waiting after applying the operations and before applying the
> commit would mean that we need to wait with the locks held. That could
> be a recipe for deadlocks in the system. I see your point related to
> performance but as we are not expecting clock skew in normal cases, we
> shouldn't be too much bothered on the performance due to this. If
> there is clock skew, we expect users to fix it, this is just a
> worst-case aid for users.
But if we make it wait at the very first operation that means we will
not suck more decoded data from the network and wouldn't that make the
sender wait for the network buffer to get sucked in by the receiver?
Also, we already have a handling of parallel apply workers so if we do
not have an issue of deadlock there or if we can handle those issues
there we can do it here as well no?
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
