Re: autovacuum ignore tables

From: "Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com>
To: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovacuum ignore tables
Date: 2006-09-29 06:40:35
Message-ID: 6992E470F12A444BB787B5C937B9D4DF060E5B49@ca-mail1.cis.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

The only issue I have with autovacuum is the fact that I have to briefly
stop/restart postgres every couple of days, which kills autovacuum and
it has no memory of previous work done. I work with several databases
with partitioned tables having high daily volume. Dropping partitioned
tables locks out jdbc inserts and the drop command itself goes into a
WAIT state. Hence, I have to stop postgres,update pg_hba.conf to prevent
access,restart postgres,drop tables and update pg_hba to allow
access(Crazy, but I have no choice because Postgres deadlocks on drop
child tables while inserts happen on the parent)

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew T. O'Connor [mailto:matthew(at)zeut(dot)net]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:22 PM
To: Sriram Dandapani
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] autovacuum ignore tables

Sriram Dandapani wrote:
>
> If I were to specify in the pg_autovacuum catalog that certain high
> volume partitioned tables(that get dropped daily) be ignored, then
> when autovacuum finishes, will it update the transaction id wraparound
> counter (this way, I can get autovacuum to finish quickly )
>
> OR
>
> Will I still need to periodically do vacuumdb -a to take care of the
> wraparound problem.
>

You don't need to do a manual vacuumdb -a since autovacuum will do this
once it decides you are getting too close to the wraparound point. I
believe this has been improved in the upcoming 8.2 release where
autovacuum no longer need to vacuum the whole database at once, rather
XID wraparound is now tracked on a per table basis.

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2006-09-29 08:56:15 Re: [JDBC] number of transactions doubling
Previous Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2006-09-29 04:22:21 Re: autovacuum ignore tables