On 2017-05-26 08:10, Erik Rijkers wrote:
If you run a pgbench session of 1 minute over a logical replication connection and repeat that 100x this is what you get:At clients 90, 64, 8, scale 25: -- out_20170525_0944.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 90 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 25 7 -- Not good. -- out_20170525_1426.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 64 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 25 18 -- Not good. -- out_20170525_2049.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 8 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 25 10 -- Not good. At clients 90, 64, 8, scale 5: -- out_20170526_0126.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 90 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 5 2 -- Not good. -- out_20170526_0352.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 64 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 5 3 -- Not good. -- out_20170526_0621.txt 100 -- pgbench -c 8 -j 8 -T 60 -P 12 -n -- scale 5 4 -- Not good.
It seems this problem is a bit less serious than it did look to me (as others find lower numbers of fail).
Still, how is its seriousness graded by now? Is it a show-stopper? Should it go onto the Open Items page?
Is anyone still looking into it? thanks, Erik Rijkers
The above installations (master+replica) are with Petr Jelinek's (and Michael Paquier's) last patches 0001-Fix-signal-handling-in-logical-workers.patch 0002-Make-tablesync-worker-exit-when-apply-dies-while-it-.patch 0003-Receive-invalidation-messages-correctly-in-tablesync.patch Remove-the-SKIP-REFRESH-syntax-suggar-in-ALTER-SUBSC-v2.patch
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
