Re: autovacuum stuck on a table for 18+ hours, consuming lots of CPU time
От | Lonni J Friedman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: autovacuum stuck on a table for 18+ hours, consuming lots of CPU time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAP=oouFrhygJz7q-dR=K3sL29M_5wXk8oooT-7ogw_z9n+a9Kg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: autovacuum stuck on a table for 18+ hours, consuming lots of CPU time (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: autovacuum stuck on a table for 18+ hours, consuming lots of CPU time
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com> writes: >> When I strace PID 30188, I see tons of this scrolling past quickly, >> but I'm not really sure what it means beyond a 'Timeout' not looking >> good: >> select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 32000}) = 0 (Timeout) >> lseek(95, 753901568, SEEK_SET) = 753901568 >> read(95, "\202\1\0\0\260\315\250\245\1\0\0\0\220\0\360\20\360\37\4 >> \0\0\0\0p\237\0\1\360\236\0\1"..., 8192) = 8192 >> lseek(95, 753917952, SEEK_SET) = 753917952 >> read(95, "\202\1\0\0 N\253\245\1\0\0\0\220\0\360\20\360\37\4 >> \0\0\0\0p\237\0\1\360\236\0\1"..., 8192) = 8192 >> select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {0, 32000}) = 0 (Timeout) > > I'm betting the selects are implementing vacuum_cost_delay, and that > the reason this is taking forever is that you have that cranked up > to an unreasonably high value. There's no evidence of looping in > what you showed us, because the seek addresses are changing. Thanks for your prompt reply. I was pretty sure that I was using the default, but just to confirm, I just ran: 'SHOW vacuum_cost_delay;' and it returned 0. Any other suggestions? Is there no way to safely kill off this autovacuum process that doesn't involve shutting down & restarting the database? thanks
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: