On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 1:33 PM Michael Lewis <mle...@entrata.com> wrote:
> It is trying to do a vacuum freeze. Do you have autovacuum turned off? Any > settings changed from default related to autovacuum? > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/routine-vacuuming.html > Read 24.1.5. Preventing Transaction ID Wraparound Failures > > These may also be of help- > > https://info.crunchydata.com/blog/managing-transaction-id-wraparound-in-postgresql > https://www.2ndquadrant.com/en/blog/managing-freezing/ > > Note that you need to ensure the server gets caught up, or you risk being > locked out to prevent data corruption. > Thanks Mike. 1) We haven't changed anything related to autovacuum except a work_mem parameter which was increased to 4 GB which I believe is not related to autovacuum 2) The vacuum was not turned off and few parameters we had on vacuum are *autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.02* and *autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.05* *3) *The database curently we are running is 2 years old for now and we have around close to 40 partitions and the datfrozenxid on the table is 343 million whereas the default is 200 million. I would try doing a manual auto vacuum on those tables where the autovacuum_freeze_max_age > 200 million. Do you think It's a right thing to do ?. I will also go through this documents. Tahnks
