Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > I admit I have no idea why these guys seem to run into wraparound > > problems so much. > > > On the other hand, I'm not sure that it would work to try to checkpoint > > "during" vacuum, because the backend is in a transaction. Maybe it > > would work

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 03 11:18:38 -0300 2011: >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > Excerpts from Fujii Masao's message of mié mar 02 22:44:45 -0300 2011: >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:22

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-03 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > I admit I have no idea why these guys seem to run into wraparound > problems so much. > On the other hand, I'm not sure that it would work to try to checkpoint > "during" vacuum, because the backend is in a transaction. Maybe it > would work to force a checkpoint after e

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-03 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 03 11:18:38 -0300 2011: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > Excerpts from Fujii Masao's message of mié mar 02 22:44:45 -0300 2011: > >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera > >> wrote: > >> > I noticed that in sta

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Fujii Masao's message of mié mar 02 22:44:45 -0300 2011: >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > I noticed that in standalone mode, WAL segments don't seem to be >> > recycled.  This could get problema

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-03 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Fujii Masao's message of mié mar 02 22:44:45 -0300 2011: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > I noticed that in standalone mode, WAL segments don't seem to be > > recycled.  This could get problematic if you're forced to vacuum large > > tables in that mode

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-02 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I noticed that in standalone mode, WAL segments don't seem to be > recycled.  This could get problematic if you're forced to vacuum large > tables in that mode and space for WAL is short. Checkpoint is required to recycle old WAL segments. C

[HACKERS] WAL segments pile up during standalone mode

2011-03-02 Thread Alvaro Herrera
I noticed that in standalone mode, WAL segments don't seem to be recycled. This could get problematic if you're forced to vacuum large tables in that mode and space for WAL is short. I can reproduce in HEAD easily by doing a large bulk insertion in standalone mode. If I stop the server, start in