I will try to simulate this and see if i can reproduce it, currently in between difficult interviews where i have little hope :)
PostgreSQL WAL Retention and Clean Up: pg_archivecleanup - Percona Database Performance Blog <https://www.percona.com/blog/2019/07/10/wal-retention-and-clean-up-pg_archivecleanup/> WAL, LSN and File Names – Luca Ferrari – Open Source advocate, human being (fluca1978.github.io) <https://fluca1978.github.io/2020/05/28/PostgreSQLWalNames.html> and you can try pg_waldump Who is spending wal crazily - Highgo Software Inc. <https://www.highgo.ca/2020/08/28/who-is-spending-wal-crazily/> to see what is in the WAL, and if you see any issues. On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 at 18:45, Vijaykumar Jain < vijaykumarjain.git...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have not seen this, so cannot comment, but when I am trying to simulate > i do not see issues. > > One thing to note, > It seems your wal is on nfs mount , can you rule out any nfs errors if it > is nfs. > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 6:24 PM Atul Kumar <akumar14...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >> archive_command is 'cp %p /nfslogs/wal/%f' >> >> and no, we are not removing anything from pg_xlog directory. >> >> once old WAL files of pg_xlog directory are archived in >> '/nfslogs/wal/' directory then these WAL files are getting generated >> with the same name in pg_xlog directory. >> >> my query is Why is this happening ? >> >> >> >> please help me with your suggestions. >> >> >> Regards. >> >> >> >> >> On 6/4/21, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <j...@dalibo.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 15:39:30 +0530 >> > Atul Kumar <akumar14...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> HI, >> >> >> >> We have a centos 6 enviornment where postgres 9.6 is running on it. >> >> >> >> We have strange behavior of WAL files of pg_xlog directory >> >> >> >> As we have set archive_command to archive WAL files at different >> >> location and the archive_command is working fine. >> >> >> >> So strange behavior is : >> >> >> >> We have a WAL file say for example "00000001000036CD000000E2" of >> >> 01.06.2021 (1st June 2021) that is getting archive successfully at the >> >> archive location and once it is archived, this file with same name >> >> (00000001000036CD000000E2) is getting generated with the latest >> >> timestamp (as today is 04.06.2021).and all old WAL files are behaving >> >> in same manner. >> > >> > What is you archive_command? >> > >> > I'm not sure I understand correctly, but keep in mind your >> > archive_command must be "read only". Do not remove the WAL file after >> > archiving >> > it. >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> >> >> -- Thanks, Vijay Mumbai, India
