Re: Autovacuum seems to block database: WARNING worker took too long to start

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Pablo Delgado Díaz-Pache
Тема Re: Autovacuum seems to block database: WARNING worker took too long to start
Дата
Msg-id AANLkTimTzDmWfmfH8ox5_Hfcga-MYs0ueAXzu553DYE3@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Autovacuum seems to block database: WARNING worker took too long to start  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Ответы Re: Autovacuum seems to block database: WARNING worker took too long to start
Список pgsql-admin
Not sure what you mean.

Once we start getting that error in the postgres log, there is no autovacuum entry. Only that error message once every minute (and as i wrote in my last email, the same message all the time).

The question is what is causing postgres to stop working. Autovacuum or another reason? If it's another reason ... what could it be?

thanks in advance for your help

2010/11/16 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Excerpts from Pablo Delgado Díaz-Pache's message of lun nov 15 04:52:53 -0300 2010:

> > But it strikes me that the code comment is wrong in one significant way:
> > if the postmaster were failing to heed SIGUSR1 at all, you could reach
> > the timeout here, because the fork-failed signal wouldn't get sent.

Hmm, yeah, I guess I wasn't considering the idea that postmaster was so
busy with something else that it wouldn't be able to respond to the
launcher's requests.  As you say, if it went away entirely, autovacuum
would also suicide.

> > Could you try strace'ing the postmaster process to see what it's doing
> > when this is happening?
>
> I definitely will.

Yes, please.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Autovacuum seems to block database: WARNING worker took too long to start
Следующее
От: Octavio
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: ignoring data type