Hi, Basically I had the same topic recently and based on observation I would say that configuration parameter hot_standby_feedback disables no only some vacuuming operations but something else as well. I played thru the same scenario where I disabled hot_standby_feedback and and vacuuming, but still had conflicts on standby node. I am on opinion that the conflict is not related with the table that has disabled vacuuming the conflict may be related with any table instead that is used during the same session/connection.
I would suggest to make sure that application/client disconnects from standby node as soon as possible in order to release all possible locks/blockers on master that may cause bloating. BR, Toomas > On 24. Jun 2020, at 11:31, RAJAMOHAN <garajamo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > Your expertise is needed on this. I was going through previous mails > regarding the same topic and was able to setup the slave with > hot_standby_feedback enabled. > Queries are running fine with bloat occuring on master. > > I tried the below scenario, where i disabled hot_standby_feedback and on > table level disabled autovacuum for 2 big tables on master. Ran the query on > the slave machine but still conflict error occurs. > > I checked the pg_stat_database_conflicts view, the counter is increasing for > confl_snapshot. Cross-checked with pg_stat_user_tables view, last time > autovacuum happened for the 2 tables was 1 day before. > > > My doubt, even though no autovacuum and no DML activities happening for both > the tables in master. Why is conflict error occuring? > > > > Thanks & Regards, > Rajamohan.J >
