Re: Cluster "stuck" in "not accepting commands to avoid wraparound data loss"

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cluster "stuck" in "not accepting commands to avoid wraparound data loss"
Date: 2015-12-17 17:31:15
Message-ID: CAMkU=1zUEU+P3R9JRUQ8Sn=5iyO0L4acmF9eQdDk4_nc2X7Afg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

>
> Looking at datfrozenxid:
> postgres=# select datname, datfrozenxid, age(datfrozenxid) FROM pg_database ;
> datname | datfrozenxid | age
> -----------+--------------+-----------
> template1 | 3357685367 | 0
> template0 | 3357685367 | 0
> postgres | 3159867733 | 197817634
> (3 rows)
> reveals that the launcher doesn't do squat because it doesn't think it
> needs to do anything.
>
> (gdb) p *ShmemVariableCache
> $3 = {nextOid = 24576, oidCount = 0, nextXid = 3357685367, oldestXid = 1211201715, xidVacLimit = 1411201715, xidWarnLimit = 3347685362,
> xidStopLimit = 3357685362, xidWrapLimit = 3358685362, oldestXidDB = 12380, oldestCommitTs = 0, newestCommitTs = 0,
> latestCompletedXid = 3357685366}

Do we know how template0 and template1 get frozen with xid which were
5 past the xidStopLimit? Is that part of the mystery here, or is that
normal?

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-12-17 18:08:15 Re: Fwd: Cluster "stuck" in "not accepting commands to avoid wraparound data loss"
Previous Message Corey Huinker 2015-12-17 17:29:14 Re: Should TIDs be typbyval = FLOAT8PASSBYVAL to speed up CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY?