My question is: Should I be surprised that the initial bulk loaded table is nowhere to be seen, given the thumbs up from the logs? Is this frailty inherent in AWS/RDS infrastructure?
Since this is an academic exorcise, I have minimal AWS support, which has yet to chime in on this matter. My access to the logs is um, er, constrained.
The big differences I notice are:
1. "postgres" is not a superuser, 2. viewing logs is a hassle.
Otherwise, they're really similar. We've pumped about 6TB of data into an instance, and it's been rock solid. JBoss is quite happy, and there haven't been any problems.
-- Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
Good to hear. I pushed this same data set into our previous server (Version 10) so I was surprised it blew up this time, though in that case these separate files were more spread out in arrival time. Nothing in the (available) logs other that lots of auto-vacuuming and the suggestion to increase wal size (which I thought a little surprising). I really would like to know just what went south but that isn't obvious yet - OOM?, network?, disk full? but I can't find any smoking gun on the AWS/RDS pages.
The difficulty in viewing logs needs to be emphasized.
