Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: can't stop autovacuum by HUP'ing the server

From: "Dave Cramer" <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: can't stop autovacuum by HUP'ing the server
Date: 2008-08-26 15:28:03
Message-ID: 491f66a50808260828h7b878d51k4619d002f45adb37@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com
> wrote:

> Dave Cramer wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera <
> > > alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > >> Certainly not, and that's not what I see here either.  I assume
> process
> > >> 25407 is (was) the postmaster, yes?
> > >>
> > >> If you "show autovacuum", is it on?
> > >
> > > Yes that was the postmaster, and I did check to see if autovacuum was
> on,
> > > and it was not.
> > >
> > So where do we go from here ?
>
> The only possible explanation for this behavior is that somebody is
> signalling the postmaster due to Xid wraparound issues.  This is keyed
> on some GUC vars -- Perhaps you have autovacuum_freeze_max_age set to an
> insane value?


Doesn't appear to be insane ?

#autovacuum_freeze_max_age = 200000000  # maximum XID age before forced
vacuum

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-08-26 15:41:09
Subject: Re: can't stop autovacuum by HUP'ing the server
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-08-26 14:56:13
Subject: Re: can't stop autovacuum by HUP'ing the server

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group