Strange VACUUM behaviour - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Florian G. Pflug
Subject Strange VACUUM behaviour
Date
Msg-id 438712F5.9070106@phlo.org
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Strange VACUUM behaviour
List pgsql-general
Hi

We started a VACUUM (not a VACUUM FULL) on one of your postgres 7.4.9
databases a few days ago. It's still running yet, and says the
folloing about once per second:

INFO:  index "pg_toast_2144146_index" now contains 1971674 row versions
in 10018 pages
DETAIL:  4 index row versions were removed.
2489 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.

The number of row versions decreases by 4 each time the message is logged.

The file belonging to pg_toast_2144146_index has about 80MB,
for pg_toast_2144146 there are 6 files, five of them are
1GB, the last one is about 5MB in size. The "original" relation
(the one that references pg_toast_2144146 in it's reltoastrelid field)
has one datafile of 11MB.

The "original" relation is called image, and is defined the following:
                 Table "public.image"
     Column     |          Type          | Modifiers
---------------+------------------------+-----------
  id            | bigint                 | not null
  image_code_id | bigint                 |
  mandant_id    | bigint                 |
  name          | text                   |
  dat           | text                   |
  mime          | text                   |
  size          | bigint                 |
  md5           | bytea                  |
  path          | text                   |
  copyright     | character varying(255) |
Indexes:
     "image_pkey" primary key, btree (id)
     "i_image_id" btree (id)
Triggers:
     _gti_denyaccess_17 BEFORE INSERT OR DELETE OR UPDATE ON image FOR
EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE _gti.denyaccess('_gti')

The table is part of a slony tableset, which is subscribed on this database.

Is there a reason that this vacuum takes so long? Maybe some lock
contention because slony replicates into this table?

greetings, Florian Pflug

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: seem.iges@mail.ee
Date:
Subject: Re: tool for DB design
Next
From: Vittorio
Date:
Subject: crosstab doesn't work