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.
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 |