From: | hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: When will old wal segments get removed? |
Date: | 2011-02-08 14:24:49 |
Message-ID: | 20110208142449.GA2736@depesz.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 02:21:08PM +0000, Thom Brown wrote:
> > $ ls -l pg_xlog/ | head
> > total 2620721
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 249 Sep 8 20:14 00000001000003DB0000003E.000061A8.backup
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:39 000000010000076D000000F7
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000F8
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000F9
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000FA
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:41 000000010000076D000000FB
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:42 000000010000076D000000FC
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:43 000000010000076D000000FD
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Feb 8 11:44 000000010000076D000000FE
> >
> > they are archived:
> > $ ls -l pg_xlog/archive_status/ | head
> > total 179
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Sep 8 20:14 00000001000003DB0000003E.000061A8.backup.done
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:39 000000010000076D000000F7.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000F8.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000F9.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:40 000000010000076D000000FA.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:41 000000010000076D000000FB.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:42 000000010000076D000000FC.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:43 000000010000076D000000FD.ready
> > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 8 11:44 000000010000076D000000FE.ready
>
> Well normally those would get deleted automatically after archiving,
> but since you're suggesting the previous archive_command didn't return
> a zero exit status, that process wouldn't have happened. If you're
> sure those are archived, can't you just go ahead and delete them
> manually?
right now archiving works, and was called for all older wal segments -
so we can see it in archive_status/.
I probably could remove them by hand, but I never feel ok to do stuff
like this manually, and what's more - i'd prefer to understand why these
are not getting removed.
Best regards,
depesz
--
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/depesz / blog: http://www.depesz.com/
jid/gtalk: depesz(at)depesz(dot)com / aim:depeszhdl / skype:depesz_hdl / gg:6749007
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael | 2011-02-08 14:30:23 | Re: Displaying text appears as hex data |
Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2011-02-08 14:21:08 | Re: When will old wal segments get removed? |