Re: vacuumdb failed - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: vacuumdb failed
Date
Msg-id 23464.967362710@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to vacuumdb failed  (George Robinson II <george.robinson@eurekabroadband.com>)
Responses RE: vacuumdb failed  ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>)
List pgsql-general
George Robinson II <george.robinson@eurekabroadband.com> writes:
>     Last night, while my perl script was doing a huge insert operation, I
> got this error...

> DBD::Pg::st execute failed: ERROR:  copy: line 4857, pg_atoi: error
> reading "2244904358": Result too large

>     Now, I'm not sure if this is related, but while trying to do vacuumdb
> <dbname>, I got...

> NOTICE:  FlushRelationBuffers(all_flows, 500237): block 171439 is
> referenced (private 0, global 1)
> FATAL 1:  VACUUM (vc_repair_frag): FlushRelationBuffers returned -2

Probably not related.  We've seen sporadic reports of this error in 7.0,
but it's been tough to get enough info to figure out the cause.  If you
can find a reproducible way to create the block-is-referenced condition
we'd sure like to know about it!

As a quick-hack recovery, you should find that stopping and restarting the
postmaster will eliminate the VACUUM failure.  The block-is-referenced
condition is not all that dangerous in itself; VACUUM is just being
paranoid about the possibility that someone is using the table that it
thinks it has an exclusive lock on.

>     Any ideas?  I'm trying a couple other things right now.  By the way,
> this database has one table that is HUGE.  What is the limit on table
> size in postgresql7?  The faq says unlimited.  If that's true, how do
> you get around the 2G file size limit that (at least) I have in solaris
> 2.6?

We break tables into multiple physical files of 1Gb apiece.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Jurgen Defurne
Date:
Subject: Re: table count limitation
Next
From: Marcin Inkielman
Date:
Subject: Re: table count limitation