From: | Rafael Martinez <r(dot)m(dot)guerrero(at)usit(dot)uio(dot)no> |
---|---|
To: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Weird WAL problem - 9.0.3 |
Date: | 2011-04-13 13:44:05 |
Message-ID: | 1302702245.8968.147.camel@core2 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 06:28 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2011 6:09:25 am Rafael Martinez wrote:
>
> Might want to take a look at:
>
[......]
> sequence). If, due to a short-term peak of log output rate, there are
> more than 3 * checkpoint_segments + 1 segment files, the unneeded
> segment files will be deleted instead of recycled until the system
> gets back under this limit."
>
Thank you.
This explains the number of WAL files generated, I was not aware of the
(3*checkpoint_segments + 1) limit (I will RTBM better next time)
But this doesn't explain the WAL files not been created/recycled
time-ordered. I wonder if this happened because the partition got full
while the WALs were created/recycled?
regards,
--
Rafael Martinez Guerrero
Center for Information Technology
University of Oslo, Norway
PGP Public Key: http://folk.uio.no/rafael/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Chambers | 2011-04-13 15:23:35 | Cursor metadata |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-04-13 13:42:00 | Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL backend process high memory usage issue |