From: | Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unexplained Major Vacuum Archive Activity During Vacuum |
Date: | 2012-11-02 08:08:33 |
Message-ID: | B291301B-2C69-4C45-AC8E-EF7CF9A75018@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 1 Nov 2012, at 17:44, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 11/01/2012 11:40 AM, Alban Hertroys wrote:
>
>> Instead of attempting to postpone freeze until beyond the life
>> expectancy of our universe, what you probably should have done is
>> vacuum more often so that vacuum has less work to do.
>
> More often than every night, with autovacuum running in the background to get regular stuff that happens during the day? 650M transactions is 3 or 4 days for us. That's hardly the lifetime of the universe. And since I didn't modify vacuum_freeze_table_age, any table vacuumed after 150M transactions is given a vacuum freeze anyway. No harm done.
150M database transactions a day sounds excessive, is there no way to reduce that number?
That aside, 650M transactions in 3 at 4 days is not equal to 150M transactions a day. It can be quite a few more. Since you mentioned that the market halted for 2 days there were probably a lot more transactions waiting than usual; not just piled up work, but lots of attempts at corrections as well. It wouldn't surprise me if you went over 650M transactions that day.
> It's my understanding you *don't* want to freeze excessively. I think once every day is bad enough, honestly.
That's not what I was suggesting. I wasn't talking about vacuum freeze but normal autovacuum with more aggressive parameters.
That should handle transaction wrap-around automatically when it looks like you're getting close to the transaction wrap-around id. As per the docs in 8.2, vacuum freeze was deprecated back then already. Knowing the devs a bit, there was a good reason to do so.
Alban Hertroys
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
cut the trees and you'll find there is no forest.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | dinesh kumar | 2012-11-02 12:26:56 | Re: Postgresql - 8.3 Replication in windows |
Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2012-11-02 08:05:09 | Re: Postgresql - 8.3 Replication in windows |