From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Uwe Bartels <uwe.bartels@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: blocking automatic vacuum
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:57:36 -0400
Message-ID: <3519.1277225856@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikWabMzCRCSWuNLuPizSSQX3YILgJrNZuzgp3yM@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikICmG_zdZRULEsoBSvxzRuPxwPgomRUsAVWgWl@mail.gmail.com>
<1494.1277218083@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<AANLkTikWabMzCRCSWuNLuPizSSQX3YILgJrNZuzgp3yM@mail.gmail.com>
Uwe Bartels <uwe.bartels@gmail.com> writes:
> i'm pretty sure there is no repetitive ddl happen on this or any other
> table. i checked this with the developers.
Well, *something* was blocking that RowExclusiveLock request, and for
sure it wasn't autovacuum. There has to be something else going on.
> but if i had an anti-wraparound vacuum, then i should see warnings like
> these in the log. am i right? I don't have any warnings that day.
> WARNING: database "mydb" must be vacuumed within 177009986 transactions
> HINT: To avoid a database shutdown, execute a database-wide VACUUM in "mydb".
Uh, no. Anti-wraparound vacuums are performed long before you would get
to the point of seeing any actual warnings.
regards, tom lane
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: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, uwe.bartels@gmail.com
Subject: Re: blocking automatic vacuum
In-Reply-To: <3519.1277225856@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox