Simon Riggs wrote:
If you want to do things a different way you need to say what you want
to do and what effects those changes will have.

I want to reduce the coupling between the primary and the master. The less they need to communicate, the better. I want to get rid of slotid, and as many of the other extra information carried in WAL records that I can. I believe that will make the patch both simpler and more robust.

Are there tradeoffs? If so what are they?

I don't think there's any big difference in user-visible behavior. RecordKnownAssignedTransactionId now needs to be called for every xlog record as opposed to just the first record where an xid appears, because I eliminated the hint flag in WAL to mark those records. And it needs to look up the recover proc by xid, instead of using the slot id. But I don't think that will have a significant impact on performance.

--
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

Reply via email to