From: Rural Hunter <ruralhunter@gmail.com>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: wrong database name in error message?
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 09:34:26 +0800
Message-ID: <52366022.8020706@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1379266279.54874.YahooMailNeo@web162902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <5233BA90.3020107@gmail.com>
<20130914045519.GD5033@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org>
<5233F3A9.30901@gmail.com>
<1379178368.98727.YahooMailNeo@web162901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
<523507DE.3060909@gmail.com>
<1379266279.54874.YahooMailNeo@web162902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-admin>
δΊ 2013/9/16 1:31, Kevin Grittner ει:
> There's your problem. You left so little space between when
> autovacuum would kick in for wraparound prevention (2 billion
> transactions) and when the server prevents new transactions in
> order to protect your data (2 ^ 31 - 1000000 transactions) that
> autovacuum didn't have enough time to complete its effort to do so.
>
> Changing a setting to ten times its default value is something
> which should always be approached with caution. In this case you
> changed the threshold for starting the work to prevent data loss
> from a little under 10% of the distance to the disastrous condition
> to a little under 100% of that distance.
>
> You could play with non-standard setting for these, but if you go
> anywhere near this extreme you risk downtime like you have just
> experienced. Personally, I have never had a reason to change these
> from the defaults.
OK, thanks for pointing out the problem. This was changed quite long
time ago when I saw too frequent auto vacuums to prevent the wrap-around
on a very busy/large table which slow down the performance. I will
change it back to the default to see how it works.
>
> To ensure that autovacuum can keep up with the activity on a
> machine like this, I have generally gone to something like:
>
> autovacuum_cost_limit = 800
>
> If you have more than a couple large tables which take long enough
> to scan to prevent small, frequently-updated tables from getting
> attention soon enough, you might want to boost
> autovacuum_max_workers, too.
>
I will try the parameters as you suggested too.
So you guys still think the problem is on db1(that's my main db) as the
error message stated? Just auto-vacuum on db1 kicked off somehow and
fixed the problem when I was running vacuum on other dbs?
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
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: ruralhunter@gmail.com, kgrittn@ymail.com
Subject: Re: wrong database name in error message?
In-Reply-To: <52366022.8020706@gmail.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