Re: [BUGS] BUG #14635: Query is executed slower on hot standby slavedatabase then on master database - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: [BUGS] BUG #14635: Query is executed slower on hot standby slavedatabase then on master database
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1yreEo+tMYq-8vjKxKES1+uNT5-9n6G9DfFpDteARUC_Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] BUG #14635: Query is executed slower on hot standby slavedatabase then on master database  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] BUG #14635: Query is executed slower on hot standby slave database then on master database  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:


On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Vitaliy Gomenyuk <vgomenyuk@callfire.com> wrote:
Hello, 

So we have two reasons of current problem:

1. Changes to hint bits are not WAL logged => can be fixed by upgrading PostgreSQL at least to 9.4 version and turning on parameter "wal_log_hints";

2. Slave DB does not use the index hint bits while it is in hot standby mode => how this can be fixed?

The main reason for slave DB not use the index hint bits because of difference
in between xmin value of both master and standby, This is required for proper
MVCC behavior for the queries that are running on the standby.

Following is the comment from the code that explains more.

/*
* During recovery we ignore killed tuples and don't bother to kill them
* either. We do this because the xmin on the primary node could easily be
* later than the xmin on the standby node, so that what the primary
* thinks is killed is supposed to be visible on standby. So for correct
* MVCC for queries during recovery we must ignore these hints and check
* all tuples. Do *not* set ignore_killed_tuples to true when running in a
* transaction that was started during recovery. xactStartedInRecovery
* should not be altered by index AMs.
*/

But why can't the same mechanisms used on tables work on indexes, which is to wait out or conflict out any too-old transactions on the standby?  Is there a fundamental reason for that, or just that no one got around to implementing it?

Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Can't restore view with pg_restore
Next
From: lsichello@illumina.com
Date:
Subject: [BUGS] BUG #14677: BLOCKER: Postgres 9.4.12 repos only presenting packagesfor RHEL7