Hi Adrian

What was the full message?

           autovacuum: VACUUM <table name >(to prevent wraparound)

Though i am running vacuum manually (nowadays) and autovacuum is running
perfectly once its threshold reaches.

What will happen if my DB reaches 200M transaction age again ? ( Here my
understanding is no dead tuples to cleanup --- I may be missing full
concept , Please correct me if i am wrong) .

What will be impact to DB ( Performance ) During Vacuum freeze ( My
Assumption is autovacuum will run "vacuum freeze" once DB age reached 200M
) ?

When should i consider to increase pg_settings value with respect to
Autovacuum ?

Regards,



On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:45 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>
wrote:

> On 3/11/19 12:16 PM, Perumal Raj wrote:
> > Hi Adrian/Joshua
> >
> > Sorry to mention in the previous thread,
> >
> > Auto-vacuum is already enabled in the Cluster and its doing the job
> > perfectly. But only thing manual vacuum scheduled now (weekly Cluster
> > wide) after noticing 'Transaction Wraparound message during Autovacuum
> run.
>
> What was the full message?
>
> >
> > Version : 9.2.24
>
> FYI 9.2 is 1 years+ past EOL.
>
> >
> > Query :
> >
> > SELECT datname, age(datfrozenxid) FROM pg_database
> >       datname      |    age
> > ------------------+-----------
> >   template1        | 133492380
> >   template0        | 180987489
> >   postgres         |  93330701
> >   nagio            | 109936658
> >   arch__old        | 109936658
> >   prod .           | 151621905
>
> So at some point the server will force a VACUUM to freeze ids and
> prevent wraparound before the age gets to your autovacuum_freeze_max_age
> below. That might even have been the message you saw.
>
> >
> > Settings :
> >
> >                name               |  setting  | unit
> > ---------------------------------+-----------+------
> >   autovacuum                      | on        |
> >   autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor | 0.05      |
> >   autovacuum_analyze_threshold    | 50        |
> >   autovacuum_freeze_max_age       | 200000000 |
> >   autovacuum_max_workers          | 3         |
> >   autovacuum_naptime              | 60        | s
> >   autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay    | 20        | ms
> >   autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit    | -1        |
> >   autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor  | 0.2       |
> >   autovacuum_vacuum_threshold     | 50        |
> >
> >   log_autovacuum_min_duration     |-1 .       |
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:07 PM Adrian Klaver
> > <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 3/11/19 11:51 AM, Perumal Raj wrote:
> >      > Hi Experts
> >      >
> >      > I have noticed in my Database that, there is no regular Vacuum
> >      > maintenance happening
> >
> >     What Postgres version?
> >
> >      > So i started Weekly Job across cluster. But still i am seeing
> >     gradual
> >      > growth on transacation ID.
> >
> >     What query are you using?
> >
> >      >
> >      > DB is still using default autovacuum_freeze_min_age &
> >      > autovacuum_freeze_table_age.
> >
> >     What are the actual settings for?:
> >
> >     https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
> >
> >      >
> >      > Question : Since i am running regularly vacuum job ( weekly) and
> the
> >      > Transaction age is gradually growing , What is next once i hit
> 200M
> >      > limit ( default ).
> >      > Should i increase my default value ? If so any calculation for
> >     increase
> >      > the value based on my DB transaction growth.
> >      >
> >      > Thanks,
> >      > Raj
> >
> >
> >     --
> >     Adrian Klaver
> >     adrian.kla...@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>
> >
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian.kla...@aklaver.com
>

Reply via email to