From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)Optiver(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: visibility map corruption |
Date: | 2021-07-06 17:27:17 |
Message-ID: | 20210706172717.GB26994@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 10:28:25PM +0000, Floris Van Nee wrote:
> >
> > I wonder if it's related to this issue:
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-
> > id/20210423234256(dot)hwopuftipdmp3okf(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
> >
> > Have you increased autovacuum_freeze_max_age from its default? This
> > already sounds like the kind of database where that would make
> > sense.
> >
>
> autovacuum_freeze_max_age is increased in our setup indeed (it is
> set to 500M). However, we do regularly run manual VACUUM (FREEZE)
> on individual tables in the database, including this one. A lot of
> tables in the database follow an INSERT-only pattern and since it's
> not running v13 yet, this meant that these tables would only rarely
> be touched by autovacuum. Autovacuum would sometimes kick in on some
> of these tables at the same time at unfortunate moments. Therefore we
> have some regular job running that VACUUM (FREEZE)s tables with a xact
> age higher than a (low, 10M) threshold ourselves.
OK, this is confirmation that the pg_resetwal bug, and its use by
pg_upgrade, is a serious issue that needs to be addressed. I am
prepared to work on it now.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2021-07-06 17:32:04 | Re: Planning time grows exponentially with levels of nested views |
Previous Message | Domingo Alvarez Duarte | 2021-07-06 16:57:22 | Re: Grammar railroad diagram |