| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |
| Date: | 2022-04-15 17:43:22 |
| Message-ID: | 20220415174322.cjandijzmxhx5fuv@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-04-15 10:23:56 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 10:15 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > > As well as the age of OldestXmin at the start of VACUUM.
> >
> > Is it worth capturing and logging both of those numbers? Why is
> > the age at the end more interesting than the age at the start?
>
> As Andres said, that's often more interesting because most of the time
> OldestXmin is not held back by much (not enough to matter).
I think it'd be interesting - particularly for large relations or when
looking to adjust autovac cost limits. It's not rare for autovac to take
long enough that another autovac is necessary immediately again. Also
helps to interpret the "dead but not yet removable" counts.
Something like:
removable cutoff: %u, age at start: %u, age at end: %u...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-15 18:12:34 | Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-04-15 17:28:35 | Crash in new pgstats code |