Re: Autovacuum Woes

From: Jayadevan M <maymala(dot)jayadevan(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Binand Sethumadhavan <binand(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Autovacuum Woes
Date: 2016-08-09 06:29:05
Message-ID: CAFS1N4gbbwZuwXVVVe8aP9xh7oNgB2jGaHC6pc3=-gtGez931w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

>
>
>
> This worked fine for many months, but of late a new problem has
> started. At the time of disabling and enabling, we are seeing large
> performance degradation. Several hundred connections like this:
>
> 19090 ? Ss 0:00 postgres: user dbname 10.13.36.19(42782)
> PARSE waiting
> 19091 ? Ss 0:00 postgres: user dbname 10.13.36.19(42783)
> PARSE waiting
> 19092 ? Ss 0:00 postgres: user dbname 10.13.36.19(42784)
> PARSE waiting
> 19093 ? Ss 0:00 postgres: user dbname 10.13.36.19(42785)
> PARSE waiting
> 19095 ? Ss 0:00 postgres: user dbname 10.13.36.19(42786)
> PARSE waiting
>
> So obviously, disabling/enabling autovacuum has side-effects.
>
>
> Use the queries in this link to find out what is blocking these
transactions.
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Lock_Monitoring
<https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Lock_Monitoring>

It is highly likely there are autovacuum processes to take care of
transactionid wraparound. (See point no 4 under Vacuuming basics)
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/routine-vacuuming.html

Regards,
Jayadevan

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2016-08-09 14:13:05 Re: Autovacuum Woes
Previous Message Binand Sethumadhavan 2016-08-09 06:02:11 Autovacuum Woes