| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | cjwhite(at)cisco(dot)com |
| Cc: | "'Robert Treat'" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Question about DB VACUUM |
| Date: | 2003-10-07 04:08:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20438.1065499687@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
"Chris White \(cjwhite\)" <cjwhite(at)cisco(dot)com> writes:
> But as you could see from the prior query \lo_list showed no large
> objects, this was done just prior to the vacuum.
> aesop=# \lo_list
> Large objects
> ID | Description
> ----+-------------
> (0 rows)
> aesop=# vacuum verbose pg_largeobject;
> NOTICE: --Relation pg_largeobject--
> NOTICE: Index pg_largeobject_loid_pn_index: Pages 2819; Tuples 460:
> Deleted 84.
This would seem to indicate that you have open transactions hanging
around somewhere in the background. VACUUM can't delete tuples that
might still be visible under MVCC rules to some open transaction.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris White (cjwhite) | 2003-10-07 04:20:43 | Re: Question about DB VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Chris White (cjwhite) | 2003-10-07 04:06:22 | Re: Question about DB VACUUM |