| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | wambacher <wnordmann(at)gmx(dot)de>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum worker running amok - and me too ;) |
| Date: | 2015-03-05 21:39:44 |
| Message-ID: | 54F8CD20.6040103@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 3/5/15 2:06 PM, wambacher wrote:
> crashed:
>
> no idea what to do now.
Crashed? Or hit by the OOM killer? What's the log say?
While this is going on you might as well disable autovac for that table.
It'll keep crashing and will interfere with your manual vacuums.
It sounds at this point like the problem is in vacuuming, not analyze.
Can you confirm? If so, please forgo analyzing the table until we can
get vacuum figured out.
What's the largest memory size that a vacuum/autovac against that table
gets to compared to other backends? You meantioned 80-90% of memory
before, but I don't know if that was for analyze or what.
I wonder if we have some kind of memory leak in GIN's vacuum support...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Steven Erickson | 2015-03-05 22:13:30 | Constraints and inheritance |
| Previous Message | wambacher | 2015-03-05 20:06:19 | Re: autovacuum worker running amok - and me too ;) |