[pgpool-general: 538] Re: load balancing seems to be bottlenecked by performance of master

[Lonni J Friedman]

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at postgresql.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
>>>> What are the reasons for analysing system catalogs on primary server?
>>>
>>> For example, if a table is a temporary one or not.
>>
>> Yes, but as I noted, I don't use temp tables at all.  If this is the
>> primary justification, then its not doing me any good, and causing
>> unnecessary negative performance impact.
>
> But how does pgpool know that you are not going to use temporary
> tables beforehand?

Provide a new pgpool.conf option that tells it to ignore them (with
the assumption that they do not exist).

>
>> I understand if this isn't something you can fix right now, but I'm
>> not even getting the impression that you consider this to be a design
>> flaw.  A high write volume on the master should never impact the
>> response time of any standby/slave with a read query.  This literally
>> means that pgpool doesn't scale well in write heavy environments.
>
> That's why I asked you any idea to solve the problem.

I guess I don't understand why pgpool needs to look up the system
catalogs on the write server.   Shouldn't they be identical on all
servers?