| From: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Muhammad Usman Khan <usman(dot)k(at)bitnine(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Paul Brindusa <paulbrindusa88(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_wal folder high disk usage |
| Date: | 2024-11-01 13:10:06 |
| Message-ID: | CAKAnmmJwRQekE-4bGAmVEoP9KQdLtWz9+=CzBYGa_11KTbeQ2g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:40 AM Muhammad Usman Khan <usman(dot)k(at)bitnine(dot)net>
wrote:
> For immediate space, move older files from pg_Wal to another storage but
> don't delete them.
>
No, do not do this! Figure out why WAL is not getting removed by Postgres
and let it do its job once fixed. Please recall the original poster is
trying to figure out what to do because they are not the database admin, so
having them figure out which WAL are "older" and safe to move is not good
advice.
Resizing the disk is a better option. Could also see if there are other
large files on that volume that can be removed or moved elsewhere, esp.
large log files.
Hopefully all of this is moot because their DBA is back from leave. :)
Cheers,
Greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | user | 2024-11-01 14:35:12 | Re: Fwd: Postgres attach partition: AccessExclusive lock set on different tables depending on how attaching is performed |
| Previous Message | thiemo | 2024-11-01 08:41:06 | Re: Plans for partitioning of inheriting tables |