"Mason Hale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It looks like "read a page, sleep for 80 milliseconds, repeat".
That's what it looks like to me too.
>> I'd look at your settings for autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit /
>> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay, and maybe the contents of pg_autovacuum.
> autovacuum_
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Mason Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Here's some of the strace output:
>>
>> select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 1}) = 0 (Timeout)
>>
>> If I read the 'select(2)' man page correctly, it appears this process is
>> waiting indefinitely for a NULL file descripto
On Jul 16, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Mason Hale wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Mason Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Here's some of the strace output:
select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 1}) = 0 (Timeout)
If I read the 'select(2)' man page correctly, it appears this
process is waitin
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Mason Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's some of the strace output:
> select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 1}) = 0 (Timeout)
>
If I read the 'select(2)' man page correctly, it appears this process is
waiting indefinitely for a NULL file descriptor.
That look
Here's some of the strace output:
select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 1}) = 0 (Timeout)
semop(9895945, 0x7fff1321db70, 1) = 0
read(72, "\233\7\0\0H\207f2\1\0\1\0`\0\0 \0 \4 \0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
8192) = 8192
select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 8}) = 0 (Timeout)
read(72, "!\5\0\0\370\2
"Mason Hale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The longest running vacuum has been running more than 6 days at this point.
Is it actually *doing* anything, or is it just blocked waiting for
someone else? strace or local equivalent would be the most definitive
way to check.
re
None of these values have changed recently.
The values are:
vacuum_cost_delay = 10ms
vacuum_cost_limit = 200
Are there any other values I should be looking at?
The longest running vacuum has been running more than 6 days at this point.
Thanks,
Mason
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Scott Marlo
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Mason Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vacuum operations on several tables are taking much longer than they
> previously were.
> We currently have 3 autovacuum processes that have been running more than 3
> days each.
> The tables are large (between 40 and 90GB eac
Vacuum operations on several tables are taking much longer than they
previously were.We currently have 3 autovacuum processes that have been
running more than 3 days each.
The tables are large (between 40 and 90GB each).
Postgresql version is 8.3.1
maintenance_work_mem is 512MB (on a 32GB server
