Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XcKSD-00037d-SK for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:36:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XcKSC-0007eS-Mv for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:36:52 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XcKSB-0007eL-CM for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:36:51 +0000 Received: from smtprelay0147.b.hostedemail.com ([64.98.42.147] helo=smtprelay.b.hostedemail.com) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XcKS7-00068z-Oq for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:36:49 +0000 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (b-bigip1 [10.5.19.254]) by smtprelay03.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91CCD1A701A; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 20:36:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 616C76686572726540616C76682E6E6F2D69702E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 50, 0, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, :::, RULES_HIT:41:355:379:599:966:967:968:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1312:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1519:1534:1541:1593:1594:1595:1596:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2196:2198:2199:2200:2393:2525:2560:2563:2682:2685:2828:2859:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3873:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4385:4605:4659:5007:6119:6261:8957:9025:9121:10004:10400:10848:11026:11232:11256:11257:11658:11914:12043:12295:12296:12438:12517:12519:12555:12660:12663:13069:13311:13357:13894:13895:21080, 0, RBL:none, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fn, MSBL:0, DNSBL:none, Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: eyes58_d2fdda7fe60 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2401 Received: from eldon.alvh.no-ip.org (unknown [181.43.15.146]) (Authenticated sender: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org) by omf13.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 20:36:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eldon.alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 15D1E1FCB; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 17:36:38 -0300 (CLST) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 17:36:37 -0300 From: Alvaro Herrera To: jim_yates Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: could not access status of transaction pg_multixact issue Message-ID: <20141009203637.GH7043@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> References: <1412791213607-5822248.post@n5.nabble.com> <20141008185538.GY7043@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> <1412797415000-5822268.post@n5.nabble.com> <20141008205416.GZ7043@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> <1412863620263-5822376.post@n5.nabble.com> <5436A34C.8090306@aklaver.com> <20141009151229.GD7043@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> <1412874160409-5822399.post@n5.nabble.com> <20141009180022.GE7043@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> <1412885826355-5822449.post@n5.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1412885826355-5822449.post@n5.nabble.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-sql Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org jim_yates wrote: > Then I'm really confused. > The minimum relminmxid for all the rows in pg_class that have relminmxid > greater then zero is 1. > That's the current value of datminmxid in pg_database. > > And the NextMultiXactId from pg_controldump is 303464. > > So if I use the min value from pg_class then I have some other issue. > > Where should I get the new pg_database value from? I'm deep in another issue which I don't want to page out right now, but try vacuuming the tables that have relminmxid=1 with low values set for vacuum_multixact_freeze_table_age and vacuum_multixact_freeze_min_age, say 100000. (I think 65536 ought to get you beyond segment pg_multixact/offset/0000, and then that file would be removed.) Since any multixact values below the point at which pg_upgrade ran should be marked "no longer running" through hint bits, there would be no pg_multixact lookups anyway and thus the vacuuming should complete with no errors. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql