Hi

ne 31. 12. 2023 v 15:15 odesílatel Ivan Kush <ivan.k...@tantorlabs.com>
napsal:

>
> On 24.12.2023 15:38, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Can you show some benchmarks? I don't like this system too much but
> > maybe it can work enough.
> >
> > Still I am interested in possible use cases. If it should be used only
> > for logging, then we can implement something less generic, but surely
> > with better performance and stability. Logging to tables is a little
> > bit outdated.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Pavel
>
> All use cases of pg_background, except asynchronous execution. If later
> add asynchronous execution, then all =)
>
For example, also:
>
> * conversion from Oracle's `PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS` to Postgres.
>
> * possibility to create functions that calls utility statements, like
> VACUUM, etc.
>

almost all these tasks are more or less dirty. It is a serious question if
we want to integrate pg_background to core.

I don't have good benchmarks now. Some simple, like many INSERTs. Pool
> gives advantage, more tps compared to pg_background with increasing
> number of backends.
>
> The main advantage over pg_background is pool of workers. In this patch
> separate pool is created for each backend. At the current time I'm
> coding one shared pool for all backends.
>

I afraid so this solution can be very significantly slower than logging to
postgres log or forwarding to syslog


>
> >
> >
> >      > 2. although the Oracle syntax is interesting, and I proposed
> >     PRAGMA
> >     more times,  it doesn't allow this functionality in other PL
> >
> >     2. Add `AUTONOMOUS` to `BEGIN` instead of `PRAGMA` in `DECLARE`?
> >     `BEGIN
> >     AUTONOMOUS`.
> >     It shows immediately that we are in autonomous session, no need to
> >     search in subsequent lines for keyword.
> >
> >     ```
> >     CREATE FUNCTION foo() RETURNS void AS $$
> >     BEGIN AUTONOMOUS
> >        INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (1);
> >        BEGIN AUTONOMOUS
> >         ....
> >         END;
> >     END;
> >     $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
> >     ```
> >
> >      > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ...
> >      > AS $$
> >      > $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql AUTONOMOUS TRANSACTION;
> >
> >     The downside with the keyword in function declaration, that we
> >     will not
> >     be able to create autonomous subblocks. With `PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS` or
> >     `BEGIN AUTONOMOUS` it's possible to create them.
> >
> >     ```
> >     -- BEGIN AUTONOMOUS
> >
> >     CREATE FUNCTION foo() RETURNS void AS $$
> >     BEGIN
> >        INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (1);
> >        BEGIN AUTONOMOUS
> >          INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (2);
> >        END;
> >     END;
> >     $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
> >
> >
> >     -- or PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS
> >
> >     CREATE FUNCTION foo() RETURNS void AS $$
> >     BEGIN
> >        INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (1);
> >        BEGIN
> >        DECLARE AUTONOMOUS_TRANSACTION;
> >          INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (2);
> >        END;
> >     END;
> >     $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
> >
> >
> >     START TRANSACTION;
> >     foo();
> >     ROLLBACK;
> >     ```
> >
> >     ```
> >     Output:
> >     2
> >     ```
> >
> >      > it doesn't allow this functionality in other PL
> >
> >     I didn't work out on other PLs at the current time, but...
> >
> >     ## Python
> >
> >     In plpython we could use context managers, like was proposed in
> >     Peter's
> >     patch. ```
> >
> >     with plpy.autonomous() as a:
> >          a.execute("INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (1) ");
> >
> >     ```
> >
> >     ## Perl
> >
> >     I don't programm in Perl. But googling shows Perl supports subroutine
> >     attributes. Maybe add `autonomous` attribute for autonomous
> execution?
> >
> >     ```
> >     sub foo :autonomous {
> >     }
> >     ```
> >
> >     https://www.perl.com/article/untangling-subroutine-attributes/
> >
> >
> >      > Heikki wrote about the possibility to support threads in Postgres.
> >
> >     3. Do you mean this thread?
> >
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/31cc6df9-53fe-3cd9-af5b-ac0d801163f4%40iki.fi
> >     Thanks for info. Will watch it. Unfortunately it takes many years to
> >     implement threads =(
> >
> >      > Surely, the first topic should be the method of implementation.
> >     Maybe
> >     I missed it, but there is no agreement of background worker based.
> >     I agree. No consensus at the current time.
> >     Pros of bgworkers are:
> >     1. this entity is already in Postgres.
> >     2. possibility of asynchronous execution of autonomous session in the
> >     future. Like in pg_background extension. For asynchronous
> >     execution we
> >     need a separate process, bgworkers are this separate process.
> >
> >     Also maybe later create autonomous workers themselves without using
> >     bgworkers internally: launch of separate process, etc. But I think
> >     will
> >     be many common code with bgworkers.
> >
> >
> >     On 21.12.2023 12:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >     > Hi
> >     >
> >     > although I like the idea related to autonomous transactions, I
> >     don't
> >     > think so this way is the best
> >     >
> >     > 1. The solution based on background workers looks too fragile -
> >     it can
> >     > be easy to exhaust all background workers, and because this
> >     feature is
> >     > proposed mainly for logging, then it is a little bit dangerous,
> >     > because it means loss of possibility of logging.
> >     >
> >     > 2. although the Oracle syntax is interesting, and I proposed PRAGMA
> >     > more times,  it doesn't allow this functionality in other PL
> >     >
> >     > I don't propose exactly  firebird syntax
> >     >
> >
> https://firebirdsql.org/refdocs/langrefupd25-psql-autonomous-trans.html,
> >
> >     > but I think this solution is better than ADA's PRAGMAs. I can
> >     imagine
> >     > some special flag for function like
> >     >
> >     > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ...
> >     > AS $$
> >     > $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql AUTONOMOUS TRANSACTION;
> >     >
> >     > as another possibility.
> >     >
> >     > 3. Heikki wrote about the possibility to support threads in
> >     Postgres.
> >     > One significant part of this project is elimination of global
> >     > variables. It can be common with autonomous transactions.
> >     >
> >     > Surely, the first topic should be the method of implementation.
> >     Maybe
> >     > I missed it, but there is no agreement of background worker based.
> >     >
> >     > Regards
> >     >
> >     > Pavel
> >     >
> >     >
> >     --
> >     Best wishes,
> >     Ivan Kush
> >     Tantor Labs LLC
> >
> --
> Best wishes,
> Ivan Kush
> Tantor Labs LLC
>
>

Reply via email to