On Mar 8, 2010, at 7:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> After it's done you probably ought to look into your autovacuum
> settings. You shouldn't have gotten into a state with so many dead
> tuples in the first place, I would think, if autovac were functioning
> properly.
Yeah, it turns out our autovacuum
Ben Chobot writes:
> ...and so on. It's been running for an hour or so now, when it appears it
> shouldn't take 10 minutes. This seems pretty weird to me has anybody else
> seen this behavior? I'm not even sure what details I could report which would
> help figure out what's going on.
You'
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Ben Chobot wrote:
>> I've got an 8.4.2 database where it appears that vacuum keeps redoing the
>> same table and indexes, never thinking it's finished:
>>
>> auditor=# VACUUM analyze VERBOSE repair_queue ;
>
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Ben Chobot wrote:
> I've got an 8.4.2 database where it appears that vacuum keeps redoing the
> same table and indexes, never thinking it's finished:
>
> auditor=# VACUUM analyze VERBOSE repair_queue ;
> INFO: vacuuming "public.repair_queue"
> INFO: scanned inde
I've got an 8.4.2 database where it appears that vacuum keeps redoing the same
table and indexes, never thinking it's finished:
auditor=# VACUUM analyze VERBOSE repair_queue ;
INFO: vacuuming "public.repair_queue"
INFO: scanned index "repair_queue_pkey" to remove 2795932 row versions
DETAIL: C
