From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ertan Küçükoğlu <ertan(dot)kucukoglu(at)1nar(dot)com(dot)tr> |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Repeating autovacuum |
Date: | 2017-04-07 22:53:03 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZQ0jC2qrci7Q5HSNEH2qGH4DrzuNd143a1dwG=bGWWJw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Ertan Küçükoğlu <ertan(dot)kucukoglu(at)1nar(dot)com(dot)tr
> wrote:
> No autovacuum parameters are changed or used. They are all remarked as in
> default config file.
>
> I wonder if that is a normal behavior as system is idle.
>
See "autovacuum_naptime (integer)"
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
Its "auto" vacuum which means it runs (nearly) continuously looking for
things to do.
I suppose that in theory it could operate in a kind of "wait/notify" mode
where every DDL against the database wakes the daemon otherwise it stays
asleep. I recall some work being done a number of years back on making the
system more energy efficient during no-activity periods - but there are
trade-offs to consider here for which I am not up-to-speed on the specifics.
It would be interesting to see the timestamps on those log entries...
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ertan Küçükoğlu | 2017-04-07 23:33:05 | Re: Repeating autovacuum |
Previous Message | Ertan Küçükoğlu | 2017-04-07 22:35:22 | Repeating autovacuum |