"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Silvio Brandani <silvio.brand...@tech.sdb.it> wrote:
>> we have develop a script to execute the vacuum full on all tables
>> of our very big database , since it is a 24 x 7 available system
>> we have not a timeframe to exec the vacuum full.
>> so we try with this script running the vauum full table by table
>> and if the vacuum generate the waiting status for other
>> connections we kill the vacuum .
>> [ and get ]
>> 2010-11-03 14:25:27 CET [19324]: [6-1] PANIC: cannot abort
>> transaction 75073917, it was already committed
> What version of PostgreSQL is this?
Anything pre-9.0 might do that; it's one of the known problems with the
old VACUUM FULL implementation that made us decide to get rid of it.
However, versions that are less than about a year old do have a hack
that should avoid the PANIC for a query-cancel interrupt ... at the
cost of ignoring the cancel interrupt, so that's not all that helpful
a solution here.
>> Is it possible to softly kill a vacuum process without risk a
>> panic ?????
> Normally, yes. VACUUM FULL is more prone to problems than a normal
> vacuum, especially if you are using an old version. There are very
> few circumstances where VACUUM FULL is the right thing to use.
Indeed. If you think you need to use VACUUM FULL on a routine basis,
rethink that.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
