On Jan 24, 2018 7:57 PM, "Claudio Freire" <klaussfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 8:50 AM, pavan95 <pavan.postgres...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> One more interesting observation made by me.
>
> I have ran the below query(s) on production:
>
> SELECT
> relname,
> age(relfrozenxid) as xid_age,
> pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(oid)) as table_size
> FROM pg_class
> WHERE relkind = 'r' and pg_table_size(oid) > 1073741824
> ORDER BY age(relfrozenxid) DESC ;
> relname |
> xid_age | table_size
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> +---------+------------
> *hxxxxxxxxxx* |
> 7798262 | 3245 MB
> hrxxxxxxxxx |
> 7797554 | 4917 MB
> irxxxxxxxxxx |
> 7796771 | 2841 MB
> hr_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 7744262 |
> 4778 MB
> reimbxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 6767712 | 1110 MB
>
> show autovacuum_freeze_max_age;
> autovacuum_freeze_max_age
> ---------------------------
> 200000000
> (1 row)
>
You seem to be rather far from the freeze_max_age. Unless you're consuming
txids at a very high rate, I don't think that's your problem.
Hi ,
Yes, but why doing vacuum freeze of a table is causing a rapid
archiving??
Any idea??
Regards,
Pavan
