Re: Autovacuum does not stay turned off

From: Jerry Champlin <jchamplin(at)absolute-performance(dot)com>
To: depesz(at)depesz(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Autovacuum does not stay turned off
Date: 2008-08-26 16:45:31
Message-ID: 48B4332B.4050207@absolute-performance.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

This makes sense. What queries can I run to see how close to the limit
we are? We need to determine if we should stop the process which
updates and inserts into this table until after the critical time this
afternoon when we can perform the required maintenance on this table.

hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 09:27:48AM -0600, Jerry Champlin wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know what will cause this bahavior for autovacuum?
>>
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
> -> autovacuum_freeze_max_age
>
> depesz
>
>
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 09:27:48AM -0600, Jerry Champlin wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know what will cause this bahavior for autovacuum?
>>
>
> You're probably approaching the wraparound limit in some database.
>
> If you think you can't afford the overhead when users are accessing
> the system, when are you vacuuming?
>
> A
>
>
We are changing the table structure tonight. These two tables are very
highly updated. The goal is to use autovacuum but not have it take 10
days to run on a 13MM record table.

Thanks

-Jerry

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-08-26 16:53:09 Re: Query w empty result set with LIMIT orders of magnitude slower than without
Previous Message henk de wit 2008-08-26 16:44:02 select on 22 GB table causes "An I/O error occured while sending to the backend." exception