Re: vac truncation scan problems

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: vac truncation scan problems
Дата
Msg-id CAB7nPqQY2vnRNA60KuDpkrrtTL6W-U2AhC27pHACwGCjNNx_iw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: vac truncation scan problems  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения


On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:26 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
Did it tell you why?  If it surrendered the lock to a competing process, it should report that as previous INFO messages. If it doesn't give one of those, then it probably just thinks there are some tuples it can't remove yet somewhere.  What did it give earlier up in the verbose output, for the number of removed and nonremovable tuples?

I just had an extra look at that, and I just got trapped a0f5954a that bumped max_wal_size from 128GB to 1GB.. Sorry for the noise.
--
Michael

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Craig Ringer
Дата:
Сообщение: pg_restore -t should match views, matviews, and foreign tables
Следующее
От: Noah Misch
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Doubt about AccessExclusiveLock in ALTER TABLE .. SET ( .. );