From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | senor <frio_cervesa(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: empty pg_stat_progress_vacuum |
Date: | 2022-11-01 06:01:56 |
Message-ID: | Y2C2VNE3vCUbvzCc@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 10:21:23PM +0000, senor wrote:
> I'm mainly wanting to understand why I'm not seeing processes in
> pg_stat_progress_vacuum. If I rapidly refresh I occasionally see an
> entry for a very small table. A manually started vacuum didn't show
> up either.
It may be possible that the run is short enough that it did not get
captured, as pg_stat_progress_vacuum is a snapshot of the current
point in time.
> Pg version 11.4
Hard to say, but I think that you should update your binaries, at
least. 11.4 has been release in June 2019, and the latest release
available is 11.17, meaning that you are missing more than three years
worth of bug fixes. Based on the roadmap in [1], 11.18 should be out
next week.
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap/
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Laurenz Albe | 2022-11-01 06:48:52 | Re: Putting the O/S user for "local" "peer" authentication in the "postgres" group vs chmod'ing the "pg*.conf" files to be readable by "all" |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2022-11-01 05:48:18 | Re: Putting the O/S user for "local" "peer" authentication in the "postgres" group vs chmod'ing the "pg*.conf" files to be readable by "all" |