public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Meyer <[email protected]>
To: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: Gabriel Guillem Barceló Soteras <[email protected]>
Cc: Pgsql-admin <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: VACUUM/ANALYZE Strategy for Low-Activity PostgreSQL 15 Instance
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:30:24 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <DU0PR08MB79216D7A1EBC77E66899D508A68EA@DU0PR08MB7921.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
	<[email protected]>

Hi, sorry about this but I cannot for the life of me unsubscribe from 
these emails. Can anyone help?

---
Rich Meyer
Sevro Consulting
[email protected]
732-991-6249
On 2026-01-13 12:26 pm, Laurenz Albe wrote:

> On Tue, 2026-01-13 at 08:19 +0000, Gabriel Guillem Barceló Soteras 
> wrote:
> 
>> We have a healthy PostgreSQL 15 instance (installed from the official 
>> Postgres repository)
>> running on Red Hat 9. It serves several databases for internal SMB 
>> applications.
>> The environment is stable--apps perform well, disk usage is fine, and 
>> the system is not
>> under heavy load.
>> 
>> After integrating PostgreSQL into our monitoring system, I noticed 
>> warnings related to VACUUM
>> and ANALYZE. Some tables have never undergone these maintenance 
>> operations, or the last run
>> was 30-200 days ago. These databases have very few deletions, and many 
>> tables show no growth
>> at all--typical for internal SMB apps.
>> I know this topic comes up often, but should I schedule a monthly 
>> VACUUM + ANALYZE via a cron
>> or systemd timer, while still keeping autovacuum enabled?
>> 
>> We're also monitoring table bloat, which is currently under 1%, 
>> suggesting that manual
>> intervention may not be necessary and that autovacuum is doing its job 
>> when needed.
> 
> I'd call this a false positive warning from the monitoring system, and 
> there is nothing
> you have to do except to disable this test.  It is perfectly healthy 
> for a table with
> few updates and deletes to ve autovacuumed very rarely.
> 
> What you should monitor is
> 
> a) whether pg_stat_all.tables.n_dead_tup is much more than 0.2 * 
> pg_class.reltuples + 50
> (that would indicate that autovacuum doesn't trigger, is too slow or 
> cannot make any
> progress owing to long-running transactions)
> 
> b) whether age(pg_class.relfrozenxid) exceeds 300 million
> (that would indicate a problem with anti-wraparound autovacuum)
> 
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: VACUUM/ANALYZE Strategy for Low-Activity PostgreSQL 15 Instance
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox