Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C9CB5DC44 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:48:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 36712-01 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 18:48:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mmp2.nems.noaa.gov (mmp2.nems.noaa.gov [140.90.121.157]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5C3B5DC1E for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:48:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [198.206.39.117] by mmp2.nems.noaa.gov (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0LOE00K5M1K2J780@mmp2.nems.noaa.gov> for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:48:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:47:51 -0400 From: David Ondrejik Subject: Re: vacuumdb question/problem In-reply-to: <3239.1310749967@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: Tom Lane , Simon Riggs , pgsql-admin Message-id: <4E208B57.6010401@noaa.gov> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_zKOLSKdRcr9gpobSubp4YA)" References: <4E206658.4040600@noaa.gov> <3239.1310749967@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.899 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201107/116 X-Sequence-Number: 37895 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_zKOLSKdRcr9gpobSubp4YA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Tom, It was not consuming any CPU time. I found that another process on the machine failed. That process was trying to write to a different table (not the one I was vacuuming) in the database and that table was locked (not sure why). It produced thousands of errors which caused the log files to grow large enough that the entire disk was filled, and this brought everything to a halt. So I had to kill my process, recover disk space and get the machine back in working condition for the weekend. I guess I will attempt to do the full vacuum again next week. I am still wondering how the vacuum process actually works. When it throws the output lines that show how many rows are recoverable/nonremovable, does this mean that the vacuum has completed? Or do those output lines show the vacuum has scanned through the database...found what what it is going to recover and then takes on the vacuum process? Thanks, Dave Tom Lane said the following on 7/15/2011 1:12 PM: > Simon Riggs writes: >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM, David Ondrejik wrote: >>> Since then, the process has continued to run (for about 20 hrs) without any >>> additional information being returned. >> Probably locked behind another long running task that is holding a buffer pin. > That's possible, or it could be busy vacuuming some (really large?) > index. Is the process actually busy, as in consuming CPU time according > to top or other process monitoring tool? > > regards, tom lane --Boundary_(ID_zKOLSKdRcr9gpobSubp4YA) Content-type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name=david_ondrejik.vcf Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: attachment; filename=david_ondrejik.vcf begin:vcard fn:David Ondrejik n:Ondrejik;David org:weather.gov/marfc;NOAA's National Weather Service adr;dom:Suite #330;;328 Innovation Blvd;State College;PA;16803 email;internet:david.ondrejik@noaa.gov title:Senior Hydrologist. Mid-Atlantic River Forecast Center tel;work:814-231-2401 version:2.1 end:vcard --Boundary_(ID_zKOLSKdRcr9gpobSubp4YA)--