RE: Rework LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com
Subject RE: Rework LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress
Date
Msg-id OS3PR01MB62752132D42E8F94A72488E69EA79@OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rework LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses RE: Rework LogicalOutputPluginWriterUpdateProgress
List pgsql-hackers
On Thur, Feb 14, 2023 at 2:03 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2023-02-13 14:06:57 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > The patch calls update_progress in change_cb_wrapper and other
> > > > wrappers which will miss the case of DDLs that generates a lot of data
> > > > that is not processed by the plugin. I think for that we either need
> > > > to call update_progress from reorderbuffer.c similar to what the patch
> > > > has removed or we need some other way to address it. Do you have any
> > > > better idea?
> > >
> > > I don't mind calling something like update_progress() in the specific cases
> > > that's needed, but I think those are just the
> > >   if (!RelationIsLogicallyLogged(relation))
> > >   if (relation->rd_rel->relrewrite && !rb->output_rewrites))
> > >
> > > To me it makes a lot more sense to call update_progress() for those, rather
> > > than generally.
> > >
> >
> > Won't it be better to call it wherever we don't invoke any wrapper
> > function like for cases REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_INVALIDATION, sequence
> > changes, etc.? I was thinking that wherever we don't call the wrapper
> > function which means we don't have a chance to invoke
> > update_progress(), the timeout can happen if there are a lot of such
> > messages.
> 
> ISTM that the likelihood of causing harm due to increased overhead is higher
> than the gain.

I would like to do something for this thread. So, I am planning to update the
patch as per discussion in the email chain unless someone is already working on
it.

Regards,
Wang wei

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nitin Jadhav
Date:
Subject: Re: Inconsistency in reporting checkpointer stats
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: windows CI failing PMSignalState->PMChildFlags[slot] == PM_CHILD_ASSIGNED