On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 7:29 AM Euler Taveira <eu...@timbira.com.br> wrote:
>
> Em seg., 21 de out. de 2019 às 21:20, Jeff Janes
> <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> >
> > After setting up logical replication of a slowly changing table using the
> > built in pub/sub facility, I noticed way more network traffic than made
> > sense. Looking into I see that every transaction in that database on the
> > master gets sent to the replica. 99.999+% of them are empty transactions
> > ('B' message and 'C' message with nothing in between) because the
> > transactions don't touch any tables in the publication, only non-replicated
> > tables. Is doing it this way necessary for some reason? Couldn't we hold
> > the transmission of 'B' until something else comes along, and then if that
> > next thing is 'C' drop both of them?
> >
> That is not optimal. Those empty transactions is a waste of bandwidth.
> We can suppress them if no changes will be sent. test_decoding
> implements "skip empty transaction" as you described above and I did
> something similar to it. Patch is attached.
I think this significantly reduces the network bandwidth for empty
transactions. I have briefly reviewed the patch and it looks good to
me.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
