X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1F69FA2E6 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:03:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10799-02 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:03:29 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 110479F9316 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:03:29 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5DCC756458; Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:03:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:03:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:03:26 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Chris Beecroft Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Some queries starting to hang Message-ID: <20060606150326.GC53487@pervasive.com> References: <22706.1149538039@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1149539978.8606.51.camel@bg002441.pro-unlimited.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1149539978.8606.51.camel@bg002441.pro-unlimited.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p4 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060606:cbeecroft@pro-unlimited.com::R/H5GhaiXD4NS7HN:0000000000 0000000000000000000000004+ri X-Hashcash: 1:20:060606:pgsql-performance@postgresql.org::Aoi/Pbb2IkDqowBV:00000 000000000000000000000000AdJY X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/55 X-Sequence-Number: 19412 On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:39:38PM -0700, Chris Beecroft wrote: > Thanks Tom, > > I knew you would come through again! > > Query is now returning with results on our replicated database. Will > vacuum analyze production now. So it seems to have done the trick. Now > the question is has our auto vacuum failed or was not set up properly... > A question for my IT people. You should almost certainly be running the autovacuum that's built in now. If you enable vacuum_cost_delay you should be able to make it so that vacuum's impact on production is minimal. The other thing you'll want to do is cut all the vacuum threshold and scale settings in half (the defaults are very conservative). -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461