public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedRe: pg_wal folder high disk usage
3+ messages / 3 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage
@ 2024-11-01 13:10 Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2024-11-03 13:59 ` Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Koen De Groote <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Greg Sabino Mullane @ 2024-11-01 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Muhammad Usman Khan <[email protected]>; +Cc: Paul Brindusa <[email protected]>; pgsql-general
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:40 AM Muhammad Usman Khan <[email protected]>
wrote:
> For immediate space, move older files from pg_Wal to another storage but
> don't delete them.
>
No, do not do this! Figure out why WAL is not getting removed by Postgres
and let it do its job once fixed. Please recall the original poster is
trying to figure out what to do because they are not the database admin, so
having them figure out which WAL are "older" and safe to move is not good
advice.
Resizing the disk is a better option. Could also see if there are other
large files on that volume that can be removed or moved elsewhere, esp.
large log files.
Hopefully all of this is moot because their DBA is back from leave. :)
Cheers,
Greg
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage
2024-11-01 13:10 Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
@ 2024-11-03 13:59 ` Koen De Groote <[email protected]>
2024-11-04 11:53 ` Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Paul Brindusa <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Koen De Groote @ 2024-11-03 13:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>; +Cc: Muhammad Usman Khan <[email protected]>; Paul Brindusa <[email protected]>; pgsql-general
A possible reason for pg_wal buildup is that there is a sort of replication
going on(logical or physical replication) and the receiving side of the
replication has stopped somehow.
This means: a different server that has a connection to your server and is
expecting to receive data. And your server is then expecting to have to
send data(this is the important bit). There could be multiple of these
connections.
If even 1 of these receiving servers is down, or the network is out, or
there is some other reason that it is no longer requesting data from your
server, your server will notice it isn't getting confirmation from that
other side, that they have received the data. As such, your postgres server
will keep this data locally, expecting this situation to be solved in the
future, and at that point in time, send all the data the other side hasn't
gotten yet.
This is 1 option. As long as your server is configured to expect that other
server to be there, and to be receiving, the buildup will continue. Taking
the other server offline won't help, in fact it is likely the cause of the
issue. The official documentation explains how to get rid of replication
slots, ideally your DBA should handle this.
Laurenz's blogpost lays out all the options, for instance it can also
happen that your system is generating data so fast, the writing of the WAL
files cannot keep up. Or your setup also does WAL archiving and the
compression on that is slow.
The post offers some ways to verify things, I suggest checking them out.
And of course, if your DBA is back, have them look at it too.
Regards,
Koen De Groote
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:10 PM Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:40 AM Muhammad Usman Khan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> For immediate space, move older files from pg_Wal to another storage but
>> don't delete them.
>>
>
> No, do not do this! Figure out why WAL is not getting removed by Postgres
> and let it do its job once fixed. Please recall the original poster is
> trying to figure out what to do because they are not the database admin, so
> having them figure out which WAL are "older" and safe to move is not good
> advice.
>
> Resizing the disk is a better option. Could also see if there are other
> large files on that volume that can be removed or moved elsewhere, esp.
> large log files.
>
> Hopefully all of this is moot because their DBA is back from leave. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage
2024-11-01 13:10 Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2024-11-03 13:59 ` Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Koen De Groote <[email protected]>
@ 2024-11-04 11:53 ` Paul Brindusa <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Paul Brindusa @ 2024-11-04 11:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Koen De Groote <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-general
Good morning Koen,
Highly appreciate your response on this.
This has clarified a little bit on the WAL files. Your insights made the
whole thing a little bit more clear.
Kind Regards,
Paul B.
On 03/11/2024 13:59, Koen De Groote wrote:
> A possible reason for pg_wal buildup is that there is a sort of
> replication going on(logical or physical replication) and the
> receiving side of the replication has stopped somehow.
>
> This means: a different server that has a connection to your server
> and is expecting to receive data. And your server is then expecting to
> have to send data(this is the important bit). There could be multiple
> of these connections.
>
> If even 1 of these receiving servers is down, or the network is out,
> or there is some other reason that it is no longer requesting data
> from your server, your server will notice it isn't getting
> confirmation from that other side, that they have received the data.
> As such, your postgres server will keep this data locally, expecting
> this situation to be solved in the future, and at that point in time,
> send all the data the other side hasn't gotten yet.
>
> This is 1 option. As long as your server is configured to expect that
> other server to be there, and to be receiving, the buildup will
> continue. Taking the other server offline won't help, in fact it is
> likely the cause of the issue. The official documentation explains how
> to get rid of replication slots, ideally your DBA should handle this.
>
> Laurenz's blogpost lays out all the options, for instance it can also
> happen that your system is generating data so fast, the writing of the
> WAL files cannot keep up. Or your setup also does WAL archiving and
> the compression on that is slow.
>
> The post offers some ways to verify things, I suggest checking them out.
>
> And of course, if your DBA is back, have them look at it too.
>
> Regards,
> Koen De Groote
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:10 PM Greg Sabino Mullane
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:40 AM Muhammad Usman Khan
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> For immediate space, move older files from pg_Wal to another
> storage but don't delete them.
>
>
> No, do not do this! Figure out why WAL is not getting removed by
> Postgres and let it do its job once fixed. Please recall the
> original poster is trying to figure out what to do because they
> are not the database admin, so having them figure out which WAL
> are "older" and safe to move is not good advice.
>
> Resizing the disk is a better option. Could also see if there are
> other large files on that volume that can be removed or moved
> elsewhere, esp. large log files.
>
> Hopefully all of this is moot because their DBA is back from
> leave. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-11-04 11:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-11-01 13:10 Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage Greg Sabino Mullane <[email protected]>
2024-11-03 13:59 ` Koen De Groote <[email protected]>
2024-11-04 11:53 ` Paul Brindusa <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox