On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 09:48:50AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Yeah I think that makes sense, done that way in the attached.
>
> Speaking about physical walsender, I moved the test to 001_stream_rep.pl instead
> (would also fail without the fix).
Hmm. I was doing some more checks with this patch, and on closer look
I am wondering if the location you have chosen for the stats reports
is too aggressive: this requires a LWLock for the WAL sender backend
type taken in exclusive mode, with each step of WalSndLoop() taken
roughly each time a record or a batch of records is sent. A single
installcheck with a primary/standby setup can lead to up to 50k stats
report calls.
With smaller records, the loop can become hotter, can't it? Also,
there can be a high number of WAL senders on a single node, and I've
heard of some customers with complex logical decoding deployments with
dozens of logical WAL senders. Isn't there a risk of having this code
path become a point of contention? It seems to me that we should
benchmark this change more carefully, perhaps even reduce the
frequency of the report calls.
--
Michael
