Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Mike Blackwell <mike(dot)blackwell(at)rrd(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Date: 2014-03-04 11:54:05
Message-ID: 20140304115405.GA29018@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-03-04 12:43:48 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>This ought to be tested with the new logical decoding stuff as it modified
> >>the WAL update record format which the logical decoding stuff also relies,
> >>but I don't know anything about that.
> >
> >Hm, I think all it needs to do disable delta encoding if
> >need_tuple_data (which is dependent on wal_level=logical).
>
> That's a pity, but we can live with it.

Agreed. This is hardly the first optimization that only works for some
wal_levels.

> If we did this at a higher level and
> checked which columns have been modified, we could include just the modified
> fields in the record, which should to be enough for logical decoding. It
> might be even more useful for logical decoding too to know exactly which
> fields were changed.

Yea, I argued that way elsewhere in this thread. I do think we're going
to need per column info for further features in the near future. It's a
bit absurd that we're computing various sets of changed columns (HOT,
key, identity) plus the pre/postfix with this patchset.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2014-03-04 11:57:10 Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2014-03-04 11:37:41 Re: Patch: show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire