Re: Unexpected cross-database vacuum impact with hot_standby_feedback=on - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Laurenz Albe
Subject Re: Unexpected cross-database vacuum impact with hot_standby_feedback=on
Date
Msg-id 8f1be0222b943a6fc99e7ef6283bd144d2d3447a.camel@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Unexpected cross-database vacuum impact with hot_standby_feedback=on  (Owen Stephens <owen@owenstephens.co.uk>)
Responses Re: Unexpected cross-database vacuum impact with hot_standby_feedback=on
List pgsql-general
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 17:34 +0100, Owen Stephens wrote:
> We are seeing that vacuum is prevented from cleaning dead tuples by an open
> transaction in a different database (where both connections are made against the
> primary server) when hot_standby_feedback = on but not when it is off. Is this
> cross-database interaction an expected effect of enabling hot_standby_feedback,
> even if the connections interact only with the primary not the replica?

Yes, that's what I would expect.  There is only one "backend_xmin" in
"pg_stat_replication", which corresponds to the snapshot held by the oldest
query in any database on the standby server.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Peter J. Holzer"
Date:
Subject: Re: Modeling combinations (options and dependencies)
Next
From: "Elterman, Michael"
Date:
Subject: Re: Trying to understand a failed upgrade in AWS RDS