On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 19:12:46 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Oops :-( We should certainly make an effort to check the validity of
> the values in pg_autovacuum, but 0 is a perfectly valid value, so the
> check would not help you any in this case :-(
Apparently not, taken into account, that the 'ena
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 00:12:32 +0200 Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 12:06:41 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > > Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> > > > The value is '0' for all columns in all entries, except 'vacrelid' and
> > > > 'enabled
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 00:12:32 +0200 Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 12:06:41 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> > > The value is '0' for all columns in all entries, except 'vacrelid' and
> > > 'enabled'.
> > > Can a VACUUM run happen, even if ena
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 12:06:41 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:30:19 +0530 Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/5/07, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:30:19 +0530 Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> > On 7/5/07, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > >
> > > > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound,
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:30:19 +0530 Pavan Deolasee wrote:
Hello,
> On 7/5/07, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
> > > the tables that ne
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 19:47:12 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
>
> Oh. It's not the age. Please let us look at the pg_stat_user_tables
> entries for the involved tables? If it's picking the same tables maybe
> pgstats has stale info, but why is it not updating it?
Hm
On 7/5/07, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
> the tables that need urgent vacuumed because they haven't been vacuumed
> in a long time.
N
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:40:15 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > >
> > > > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
>
Hello,
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:40:15 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
> > > the tables that need urgent vacuumed because t
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
> > the tables that need urgent vacuumed because they haven't been vacuumed
> > in a long time.
>
> No, autovacuum
Hello,
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely
> the tables that need urgent vacuumed because they haven't been vacuumed
> in a long time.
No, autovacuum is doing this with every run. Beside this, the data
Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> we got a small problem with auto_vacuum: since we have some big tables
> which have heavy read/write access, we tried to exclude this tables
> from autovacuum:
>
> database1=# select vacrelid,enabled,(select relname from pg_class where
> oid=vacreli
13 matches
Mail list logo
