Re: 3rd time is a charm.....right sibling is not next child crash.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Amiel <jamiel(at)istreamimaging(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 3rd time is a charm.....right sibling is not next child crash.
Date: 2010-06-08 17:56:10
Message-ID: 7550.1276019770@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Jeff Amiel <jamiel(at)istreamimaging(dot)com> writes:
> On a side note, I am 100% sure that autovacuum was disabled when I brought
> the database back up after the core dump(s). However, minutes after
> restarting, some of my larger tables started getting vacuumed by pgsql user.
> Any way that a vacuum would kick off for a particular table (or series of
> tables) even when autovacuum was off in the postgresql.conf?

Anti-transaction-wraparound vacuums, perhaps?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message uaca man 2010-06-08 18:00:35 Re: Queues Problem
Previous Message Andy Colson 2010-06-08 17:56:07 Re: Some insight on the proper SQL would be appreciated

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Amiel 2010-06-08 18:04:38 Re: 3rd time is a charm.....right sibling is not next child crash.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-06-08 17:50:13 _bt_parent_deletion_safe() isn't safe