Philipp Marek wrote: > A few days before we found the machine much slower, because of the autovacuum > processes that were started automatically ["autovacuum: VACUUM ... (to > prevent > wraparound)"]. > > After several days we killed that, and, as a quick workaround, changed > "autovacuum_freeze_max_age" to 1G and restarted the server, which worked as > before (and didn't ran the autovacuum processes).
Several days? How large is your vacuum_cost_delay and autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay parameters? > As a next idea we changed the cluster/reindex script to set > "vacuum_freeze_min_age=0" before the CLUSTER call, hoping that this would > solve our transaction ID wraparound problem. REINDEX? What are you doing REINDEX for? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
