Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski <me(at)komzpa(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)
Date: 2020-03-30 06:49:35
Message-ID: CAApHDvo9fuqHuuciejpP+9HxYvawqZhQgYqHU3EtLOfJt-B4pA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 17:57, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> How can it be that even after an explicit VACUUM, this patch can cause
> unstable regression test results?

I only added vacuums for mcv_lists. The problem with petalura [1] is
with the functional_dependencies table.

I'll see if I can come up with some way to do this in a more
deterministic way to determine which tables to add vacuums for, rather
than waiting for and reacting post-failure.

[1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=petalura&dt=2020-03-30%2002%3A20%3A03

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-03-30 07:01:18 Re: pg_stat_statements issue with parallel maintenance (Was Re: WAL usage calculation patch)
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-03-30 06:46:34 Re: pg_stat_statements issue with parallel maintenance (Was Re: WAL usage calculation patch)