Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-08-18T20:57:13Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Tested that. It does look like if I increase vacuum_cost_limit to 10000
> and lower vacuum_cost_page_dirty to 10, it reads 5-7 pages and writes
> 2-3 before each pollsys. The math seems completely wrong on that,
> though -- it should be 50 and 30 pages, or similar. If I can, I'll test
> a vacuum without cost_delay and make sure the pollsys() are connected to
> the cost delay and not something else.
Hmmm. Looks like, at least in 8.3, running a manual vacuum on a table
doesn't prevent anti-wraparound vacuum from restarting. So I can't do
any further testing until we can restart the server.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com