| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Prakash Itnal <prakash074(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, rasna(dot)t(at)nokia(dot)com, sandhya(dot)k_s(at)nokia(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Auto-vacuum is not running in 9.1.12 |
| Date: | 2015-06-18 12:13:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20150618121356.GD133018@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Cédric Villemain wrote:
>
>
> Le 17/06/2015 23:10, Alvaro Herrera a écrit :
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> launcher_determine_sleep() does have a minimum sleep time, and it seems
> >> like we could fairly cheaply guard against this kind of scenario by also
> >> enforcing a maximum sleep time (of say 5 or 10 minutes). Not quite
> >> convinced whether it's worth the trouble though.
> >
> > Yeah, the case is pretty weird and I'm not really sure that the server
> > ought to be expected to behave. But if this is actually the only part
> > of the server that misbehaves because of sudden gigantic time jumps, I
> > think it's fair to patch it. Here's a proposed patch.
>
> Does that still respect an autovacuum_naptime (GUC) greater than 5 minutes ?
Yes, sure. The launcher will wake up, see time-to-vacuum further away,
then continue sleeping.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-06-18 12:34:37 | Re: 9.5 make world failing due to sgml tools missing |
| Previous Message | Cédric Villemain | 2015-06-18 10:05:32 | Re: Auto-vacuum is not running in 9.1.12 |