Fujii Masao wrote:
- WALSender reads from WAL buffers and/or WAL files and sends the
buffers to WALReceiver. In phase one, we may assume that WALSender can
only read from WAL buffers and WAL files in pg_xlog directory. Later
on, this can be improved so that WALSender can temporarily restore
archived files and read from that too.
You mean that only walsender performs xlog streaming and copying
from pg_xlog serially? I think that this would degrade the performance.
And, I'm worried about the situation that the speed to generate xlog
on the primary is higher than that to copy them to the standby. We
might not be able to start xlog streaming forever.

I've seen a few references to this. Somebody else mentioned how a single TCP/IP stream might not have the bandwidth to match changes to the database.

TCP/IP streams do have a window size that adjusts with the load, and unless one gets into aggressive networking such as bittorrent which arguably reduce performance of the entire network, why shouldn't one TCP/IP stream be enough? And if one TCP/IP stream isn't enough, doesn't this point to much larger problems, that won't be solved by streaming it some other way over the network? As in, it doesn't matter what you do - your network pipe isn't big enough?

Over the Internet from my house to a co-located box, I can reliably get 1.1+ Mbyte/s using a single TCP/IP connection. The network connection at the co-lo is 10Mbit/s and my Internet connection to my house is also 10Mbit/s. One TCP/IP connection seems pretty capable to stream data to the full potential of the network...

Also, I assume that most database loads have peaks and lows. Especially for very larger updates, perhaps end of day processing, I see it as a guarantee that all of the stand bys will fall "more behind" for a period (a few seconds to a minute?), but they will catch up shortly after the peak is over.

Cheers,
mark

--
Mark Mielke <[email protected]>


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to