From: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pinker <pinker(at)onet(dot)eu> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: VACUUM FULL doesn't reduce table size |
Date: | 2015-03-09 16:19:21 |
Message-ID: | 20150309121921.4e6c6c6f5503e65adc127ddb@potentialtech.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:05:07 -0700 (MST)
pinker <pinker(at)onet(dot)eu> wrote:
>
> > So there are no longer any dead rows being left behind, right?
> >
> > Why are we still discussing this? Do you have some other question?
>
> There are no dead rows, but postgres still cannot reuse the space because of
> 3043947 nonremovable row versions ..
>
> INFO: vacuuming "my_table"
> INFO: "my_table": found 0 removable, 3043947 nonremovable row versions in
> 37580 pages
> DETAIL: 0 dead row versions cannot be removed yet.
> CPU 2.67s/1.59u sec elapsed 7.71 sec.
> Query returned successfully with no result in 8319 ms.
Given your weird description of the "snapshot" I wouldn't be surprised if
that instance of PostgreSQL had subtle corruption.
pg_dump that database, re-init it and reload the dump. Then recreate the
situation and see if the rows are sill nonremovable. I bet you $5.34 that
everything works fine after that, which would indicate that the folks
who made the snapshot didn't do it correctly.
--
Bill Moran
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-03-09 16:19:23 | Re: VACUUM FULL doesn't reduce table size |
Previous Message | pinker | 2015-03-09 16:05:07 | Re: VACUUM FULL doesn't reduce table size |