Re: Server vacuuming the same table again and again

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Дмитрий Шалашов <skaurus(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Previously during load disk was 100% busy; now we have around 100 active
> state queries, 100% loaded proc, but disk is virtually idle...

That was happen after changing checkpoit_segments setting?

>
>
> Best regards,
> Dmitriy Shalashov
>
>
> 2014-04-25 12:22 GMT+04:00 Дмитрий Шалашов <skaurus(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>> Hi Ilya!
>>
>> > Actually, thise two things are tightly bound and there is no chance to
>> > avoid vacuum, you can only postpone it, this kind of work eventually
>> > supposed to be done.
>>
>> I understand that autovacuum has to be done, but not right after previous
>> autovacuum? And then again and again.
>> And after cancelling that first autovacuum I started another one by hand;
>> from there no autovacuum was cancelled.
>>
>> > ionice autovacuum instead of mission critical ckeckpointer or bgwriter
>> Yeah, that was desperate. I restarted server when I had a chance - to drop
>> my ionice settings back to defaults.
>>
>> > Which exact values have you in the following settings:
>>
>> autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.1
>> autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 50
>> autovacuum_freeze_max_age = 200000000
>> autovacuum_max_workers = 3
>> autovacuum_naptime = 60
>> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 20
>> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit = -1
>> autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.2
>> autovacuum_vacuum_threshold = 50
>> log_autovacuum_min_duration = 0
>>
>> All defaults except last one I believe.
>>
>>
>> Minwhile I noticed in the night logs:
>> checkpoints are occurring too frequently (138 seconds apart)
>> Consider increasing the configuration parameter "checkpoint_segments".
>>
>> Increased checkpoint_segments to 256 and reloaded config.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Dmitriy Shalashov
>>
>>
>> 2014-04-25 12:12 GMT+04:00 Ilya Kosmodemiansky
>> <ilya(dot)kosmodemiansky(at)postgresql-consulting(dot)com>:
>>
>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Дмитрий Шалашов <skaurus(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > cancelled autovacuum and it seems to help.
>>>
>>> > In the morning autovacuum was back. And then it finished and I gone to
>>> > work.
>>>
>>> Actually, thise two things are tightly bound and there is no chance to
>>> avoid vacuum, you can only postpone it, this kind of work eventually
>>> supposed to be done.
>>>
>>> What you really need to do as a first thing - configure your
>>> autovacuum aggressively enough and then mayde ionice autovacuum
>>> instead of mission critical ckeckpointer or bgwriter.
>>>
>>> Which exact values have you in the following settings:
>>>
>>> autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor
>>> autovacuum_analyze_threshold
>>> autovacuum_freeze_max_age
>>> autovacuum_max_workers
>>> autovacuum_naptime
>>> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay
>>> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit
>>> autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor
>>> autovacuum_vacuum_threshold
>>> log_autovacuum_min_duration
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> Best regards, Ilya
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Dmitriy Shalashov
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ilya Kosmodemiansky,
>>>
>>> PostgreSQL-Consulting.com
>>> tel. +14084142500
>>> cell. +4915144336040
>>> ik(at)postgresql-consulting(dot)com
>>
>>
>

--
Ilya Kosmodemiansky,

PostgreSQL-Consulting.com
tel. +14084142500
cell. +4915144336040
ik(at)postgresql-consulting(dot)com