Re: vacuum, dead rows, usual solutions didn't help

From: Gábor Farkas <gabor(at)nekomancer(dot)net>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum, dead rows, usual solutions didn't help
Date: 2008-01-10 06:52:08
Message-ID: 4785C098.6020804@nekomancer.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Gábor Farkas wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> i have a postgresql-8.2.4 db,
>>
>> and vacuuming it does not remove the dead rows
>>
>>
>> basically, the problem is this part of the vacuum-output:
>
>> on the db-server, 4 postgres processes are "idle in transaction", but
>> none is older than 2 days.
>
> If you have something idle in transaction, your vacuums are useless. You
> need to fix your app.
>

maybe i described it the wrong way:

there is only 1 process, that is constantly "idle in transaction".

the remaining 3 were only idle-in-transaction at that point. so if i
would keep checking for idle-in-transaction processes, the list of them
would keep changing.

are you saying, that a process should NEVER be idle-in-transaction? not
even for a short time? (like some seconds?)

also, even if it is wrong, can an 'idle-in-transaction' connection that
was opened today block the vacuuming of rows that were deleted yesterday?

thanks,
gabor

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sim Zacks 2008-01-10 07:06:50 Re: count(*) and bad design was: Experiences with extensibility
Previous Message Gábor Farkas 2008-01-10 06:46:50 Re: vacuum, dead rows, usual solutions didn't help