Hi Alvaro,
Thank you for your quick response!
We do have fsync turned on, and there was no disk failure. The database
had to be shut down forcefully because it was becoming nonresponsive
(probably due to inadequate earlier vacuuming) and we could not get the
remaining queries to terminate with no
> On Feb 25, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Tong Pham wrote:
>
>> We do have fsync turned on, and there was no disk failure. The database
>> had to be shut down forcefully because it was becoming nonresponsive
>> (probably due to inadequate earlier vacuuming) and we could not get t
Tong Pham wrote:
> We do have fsync turned on, and there was no disk failure. The database
> had to be shut down forcefully because it was becoming nonresponsive
> (probably due to inadequate earlier vacuuming) and we could not get the
> remaining queries to terminate with normal cancel/terminate
tpham wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Two weeks ago, one of our Postgres databases crashed violently and had to be
> brought up again. This certainly resulted in some lost pg_clog files, and we
> had to zero-fill them in one by one to get autovacuum up and running again.
You should never lose pg_clog f
Hi everyone,
Two weeks ago, one of our Postgres databases crashed violently and had to be
brought up again. This certainly resulted in some lost pg_clog files, and we
had to zero-fill them in one by one to get autovacuum up and running again.
Now, we have two autovacuuming processes constantly st
