Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/18/17 12:00, Petr Jelinek wrote: > As for apply_worker_launch_interval, I think we want different > name so that it can be used for tablesync rate limiting as well. But that's a mechanism we don't have yet, so maybe we should design that when we get there? -- Peter Eisentraut

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-18 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 18/04/17 16:24, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 4/16/17 22:40, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> Attached two patches add new GUCs apply_worker_timeout and >> apply_worker_launch_interval which are used instead of >> wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_timeout. These new >> parameters are not

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/16/17 22:40, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Attached two patches add new GUCs apply_worker_timeout and > apply_worker_launch_interval which are used instead of > wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_timeout. These new > parameters are not settable at worker-level so far. Under what

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-16 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 14/04/17 14:30, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >>> I am not quite sure adding more GUCs is all that great option. When >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-14 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 14/04/17 14:30, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> I am not quite sure adding more GUCs is all that great option. When >> writing the patches I was wondering if we should perhaps rename the >> wal_receiver_timeout

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-14 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 14/04/17 12:57, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I noticed that the logical replication launcher uses >> wal_retrieve_retry_interval as a interval of launching logical >> replication worker process. This

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-14 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > I am not quite sure adding more GUCs is all that great option. When > writing the patches I was wondering if we should perhaps rename the > wal_receiver_timeout and wal_retrieve_retry_interval to something that >

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval

2017-04-14 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 14/04/17 12:57, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that the logical replication launcher uses > wal_retrieve_retry_interval as a interval of launching logical > replication worker process. This behavior is not documented and I > guess this is no longer consistent with what its name