pg.ddx.io  pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Lister <john.lister@kickstone.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: John Lister <john.lister-ps@kickstone.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 09:27:32 +0000
Message-ID: <4D3AA304.7070506@kickstone.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2081.1295653238@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <927BF3A3F54247FF8C63219A00CE98B5@squarepi.com>
	<1427.1295651046@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<A83ED098FF4346FFBA6AB8A2AA46A218@squarepi.com>
	<2081.1295653238@sss.pgh.pa.us>


On 21/01/2011 23:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> "John Lister"<john.lister-ps@kickstone.com>  writes:
>> On another bizarre note, A database wide vacuum has just finished, but I'm
>> still getting the warnings:
>> GMT WARNING:  database "backend" must be vacuumed within 10205310
>> transactions
> Did you do that vacuum as a superuser?
Thanks for your help, but I managed to work it out using an answer you 
gave in another thread. I looked at which tables had a frozen xid equal 
to the database value and found that there were 7 temporary tables with 
numbers equal or very close to it. I couldn't find a way to determine 
which process created those tables ( - is this possible?) and therefore 
see how long it had been running, etc

Instead I tried to vacuum them, but this didn't make any difference (or 
indeed do anything), so in the end I deleted the tables manually 
instead, which instantly reset the transaction count back to the 
1billion mark.  I now need to find out which process probably died due 
to its temp tables disappearing, again they appeared odd - single 
alphabetical names - which I wasn't expecting...

Was this expected behaviour with temporary tables?

Cheers
John



view thread (11+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <4D3AA304.7070506@kickstone.com>
Permalink:  ../4D3AA304.7070506@kickstone.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/4D3AA304.7070506@kickstone.com

 · 

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: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
  Cc: john.lister@kickstone.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, john.lister-ps@kickstone.com
  Subject: Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?
  In-Reply-To: <4D3AA304.7070506@kickstone.com>

* 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