On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 07:01:10AM -0600, Scott Whitney wrote: > Ooops...I accidentally took this off list, as Kevin was nice enough to point > out. > > > >> What am I looking for? > > >Outliers. > > > Yeah. It's just those 2. I'd assume that the db I created > > yesterday would be an outlier, but template0 has been there all along > > (of course) and is still listed as 648, a significantly smaller number. > > > >> The output shows me 345 rows, most of which are 132xxxxx numbers. > >> Two of them (template0 and a database created yesterday) say 648. > > >The template0 database is what's keeping the clog files from being > >cleaned up, but I guess the big question is why you care. They will > >go away eventually, and shouldn't affect performance. Are they > >taking enough space to merit extraordinary effort to clean them up? > > -Kevin > > > My concern is that when we had a failure a few years ago, and one of the clog > files went bad. I had to manually recreate some customer data after bringing > up the previous backup. So, I'd rather have them not there, because, well, if > there are 200 of them in the dir, there's a higher chance in a case of a > crash that one goes bad than if I have 15. > > Would adding -f (full) clean these up? I seem to recall it did in earlier > versions. I've added the -F to it already, and that didn't seem to help. >
If you have hardware problems like that you have way more problems. You could have corruption (silent) occurring in any of the other database files. Good luck. Cheers, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
