| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hans Sebastian <hnsbstn(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Old active connections? |
| Date: | 2018-04-18 02:06:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20180418020652.GH18178@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 05:11:10PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> Long-lived non-idle statements would likely be waiting for a lock to be
> released.
Be very careful with transactions marked as "idle in transaction" for a
long time. Long-running transactions prevent VACUUM to do its work as
the oldest XID in view is not updated, causing performance to go down,
and bloat to go up.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-04-18 04:35:43 | Re: Can PostgreSQL create new WAL files instead of reusing old ones? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-04-18 00:11:10 | Re: Old active connections? |