Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E524463233F for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:27:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 58845-04 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:27:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C146321BB for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:27:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o68JR3eC000324; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:27:03 -0400 (EDT) To: "Kevin Grittner" cc: "Robert Haas" , "Richard Yen" , "Scott Marlowe" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [Slony1-general] WAL partition overloaded--by autovacuum? In-reply-to: <4C35DADF020000250003326D@gw.wicourts.gov> References: <03D2C5F0-F222-4088-B5E4-8DA688565B70@iparadigms.com> <78E79F0B-5C6C-4BDA-B69C-C0FBF69ABBC7@iparadigms.com> <4C35DADF020000250003326D@gw.wicourts.gov> Comments: In-reply-to "Kevin Grittner" message dated "Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:04:15 -0500" Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:27:02 -0400 Message-ID: <323.1278617222@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201007/119 X-Sequence-Number: 39508 "Kevin Grittner" writes: > You're not alone. At first I was assuming that it was because of > archiving, but the OP says that's turned off. Unless it had been on > and there wasn't a *restart* after changing the configuration, Yeah, I was less than convinced by his eyeball report of that, too. "show archive_mode" would be a much more convincing check of the server's state. Or would have been, if the server hadn't been restarted since the problem occurred. archive_mode on with a bad archive_command would lead directly to the reported problem ... although it should also lead to pretty obvious complaints in the postmaster log. (Hmm ... but those complaints are logged at level WARNING, which as discussed elsewhere is really lower than LOG. Should we change them?) regards, tom lane