From: | "John R Pierce" <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql -bugs" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: vacuum problem |
Date: | 2004-09-13 16:22:38 |
Message-ID: | 06b101c499ad$e318ecf0$0200a8c0@hogranch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
>> there are no background programs. I've done all the usual checking of
>> `ps'
>> outputs looking for such.
>
>> in the test case I mailed to this list, I had created a standalone
>> database
>> with one table, and run the test program directly against it.
>
> That sounds suspiciously like you think that only background clients
> connected to the same database count. Actually, any other client
> connected to the same *postmaster* can look like an open transaction
> to VACUUM ...
indeed, I did think this. A completely different development project on the
same server was in fact leaving a postmaster 'idle in transaction'... I
didn't realize this would matter.
I had that developer kill his 'idle in transaction' process, and voila, I
can vacuum my table now on the fly. I told him to fix his logic to STOP
doing that, he's a SQL novice.
so, my huge apologies for wasting the buglist's time on this.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | elein | 2004-09-13 19:47:54 | 8.0B2 psql \e |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-09-13 14:11:20 | Re: PosgreSQL is crashing with a signal 11 - Bug? |