Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?

From: Aleksey Tsalolikhin <atsaloli(dot)tech(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?
Date: 2012-03-08 02:27:13
Message-ID: CA+jMWofRNwh58kWLgwFNbq2O+gUUpGc_+6Ehrzt0Ou3apxgv1w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Aleksey Tsalolikhin
<atsaloli(dot)tech(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>  We're replicating a PostgreSQL 8.4.x database using Slony1-1.2.x
>
>  The origin database "data/base" directory is 197 GB in size.
>
>  The slave database "data/base" directory is 562 GB in size and is
>  over 75% filesystem utilization which has set off the "disk free" siren.
>
>  My biggest table* measures 154 GB on the origin, and 533 GB on
>  the slave.  (*As reported by
>
>  SELECT relname as "Table", pg_size_pretty(pg_total_relation_size(relid))
>   As "Size" from pg_catalog.pg_statio_user_tables
>   ORDER BY pg_total_relation_size(relid) DESC;
>  )

I ran VACUUM FULL on this table, but it is still over 500 GB in size.
And growing...
I'm up to 77% utilization on the filesystem.

"check_postgres --action=bloat" now returns OK. So it's not bloat.
What else could it be?

Best,
Aleksey

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2012-03-08 04:12:01 Re: Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?
Previous Message Daniele Varrazzo 2012-03-08 02:11:57 Re: rounding a timestamp to nearest x seconds