Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?
Date
Msg-id 1234559763.6483.1.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?  (Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>)
Responses Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:51 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I found this today. Note, auto vacuum has been disabled for this
> > relation for a very, very long time. At the very end you will see that
> > this relation has been autovacuumed previously as well. We have a manual
> > cron to vacuum this table every hour so I am unsure why autovacuum is
> > doing what it is doing.
> >
> > app=# select * from pg_autovacuum where vacrelid = '21474846';
> > -[ RECORD 1 ]----+---------
> > vacrelid         | 21474846
> > enabled          | f
> > vac_base_thresh  | 0
> > vac_scale_factor | 0
> > anl_base_thresh  | 0
> > anl_scale_factor | 0
> > vac_cost_delay   | 0
> > vac_cost_limit   | 0
> > freeze_min_age   | 0
> > freeze_max_age   | 0
> >
> 
> i was bitten for this already... the problem is that you have all
> parameters in 0... they should be -1 (specifically max_freeze_age)
> 

Thanks for the work around, but that is ridiculous. I still say this is
a bug. If I say enabled = f, the *only* thing that should be firing
autovacuum on that relation is xid wrap.

Sigh...

Joshua D. Drake


-- 
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org  Consulting, Development, Support, Training  503-667-4564 -
http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: The science of optimization in practical terms?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?