| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: How to stop autovacuum silently |
| Date: | 2023-11-22 18:12:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzm5r6Th9OuikT5ZkWC6F4jsZ46Z=uPRgfnj5_1_1uj8bg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:18 AM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Recently, one of our customers had reported a not working autovacuum. After a minor investigation, I've found that
> autovacuum launcher did, actually, run vacuum as expected, but with no results. At the same time, no warnings or
> other anomies were present in the logs.
Are you aware of commit e83ebfe6d7, which added a similar WARNING at
the point when VACUUM overwrites a relfrozenxid/relminmxid "from the
future"? It's a recent one.
> At first, I've thought may be statistics is broken, thus vacuum is not working as expected. But in fact, something
> more interesting is had happened.
Was pg_upgrade even run against this database? My guess is that the
underlying problem was caused by the bug fixed by commit 74cf7d46.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-11-22 18:49:35 | Re: autovectorize page checksum code included elsewhere |
| Previous Message | Tristan Partin | 2023-11-22 17:29:42 | Re: psql not responding to SIGINT upon db reconnection |