Greg Williamson wrote:
running transactions can cause autovacuum processes to stall
out or be autocancelled. "Long running transactions" - is now
long? In our system it's rare to have a transaction (even a
prepared transaction) last much longer than a few minutes. Is
that
On 11/13/2012 10:29 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 04:04 AM, Lists wrote:
>>
>> There's a wealth of how to tune PG instruction that's old and (based
>> on this thread alone) often stale enough to be classified as
>> disinformative. For example, nearest I can tell, the entirety of this
>> p
On 11/13/2012 04:04 AM, Lists wrote:
>
> There's a wealth of how to tune PG instruction that's old and (based
> on this thread alone) often stale enough to be classified as
> disinformative. For example, nearest I can tell, the entirety of this
> page is just wrong and/or irrelevant for 9.x and up:
Kevin --
You wrote:
<...>
>>> running transactions can cause autovacuum processes to stall
>>> out or be autocancelled. "Long running transactions" - is now
>>> long? In our system it's rare to have a transaction (even a
>>> prepared transaction) last much longer than a few minutes. Is that
>>> en
Lists wrote:
> There's a wealth of how to tune PG instruction that's old and
> (based on this thread alone) often stale enough to be classified
> as disinformative. For example, nearest I can tell, the entirety of
> this page is just wrong and/or irrelevant for 9.x and up:
> http://wiki.postgresql
The good news is that we have now resolved our critical problem (disk
space overuse) with a somewhat hackish, slow answer that is nonetheless
good enough for now.
Now I'd like to work out how to get autovacuum to work smoothly within
our cluster. I'm happy to try to clarify my notes and post t
