Jan, Thanks much for all the help. I’ve been looking over logswitch finish and the event and changelog tables. Selecting logswitch_finish() on one of my replicas simply returned ""Slony-I: log switch to sl_log_2 still in progress - sl_log_1 not truncated” All three seem to be in that state with either sl_log_1 or sl_log_2. Looking closer at sl_event and sl_log_2 I’m seeing some strangeness.
ams=# select min(pg_catalog.txid_snapshot_xmin(ev_snapshot)), max(pg_catalog.txid_snapshot_xmin(ev_snapshot)) from _ams_cluster.sl_event where ev_origin = 1; min | max -----------+----------- 139136948 | 139204299 (1 row) ams=# select min(log_txid), max(log_txid) from _ams_cluster.sl_log_2 where log_origin = 1; min | max -----------+----------- 631532717 | 631661386 (1 row) ams=# So I understand all the txids referenced in sl_event are in the 139M range while all those in sl_log_2 are in the 631M range. Normally, the sl_log txids should be older, shouldn’t they? Do you think I’ve hit a txid-wraparound problem? Tom :-) On 1/28/16, 1:09 PM, "Jan Wieck" <j...@wi3ck.info> wrote: >On 01/28/2016 11:11 AM, Tignor, Tom wrote: >> >> Output below. They seem to be replicating normally, except for the >>sl_log >> growth. > >Indeed. Is there anything in the slon logs for those nodes that says why >it doesn't finish the log switch? > >Connect to the database as a the slony user. > >To check if a log switch is indeed in progress, do > > SELECT last_value FROM _ams_cluster.sl_log_status; > >It should be either 2 or 3. If it is 0 or 1, no log switch is in >progress and you can start one with > > SELECCT _ams_cluster.logswitch_start(); > >If it is 2 or 3, then you can do > > SELECT _ams_cluster.logswitch_finish(); > >All these operations are harmless and will only do what is safely >possible. Look at the code of logswitch_finish() to find out how it >determines if the current log switch can be finished. In short, the >cleanup thread is removing events from sl_event that have been confirmed >by all nodes in the cluster. The function logswitch_finish() looks if >there is anything left in sl_event, that belonged to that old log. If so >it will not finish. Running those queries manually you can find out what >that event is that is preventing the switch to finish. > > > >> >> >> a...@ams-repl2.ams.netmgmt:~$ /a/third-party/postgresql/bin/psql -U >> ams_slony -d ams -c 'select * from _ams_cluster.sl_status' >> st_origin | st_received | st_last_event | st_last_event_ts >> | >> st_last_received | st_last_received_ts | >> st_last_received_event_ts | st_lag_num_events | st_lag_time >> >>-----------+-------------+---------------+------------------------------- >>+- >> >>-----------------+-------------------------------+----------------------- >>-- >> ------+-------------------+----------------- >> 2 | 1 | 5000611610 | 2016-01-28 >>16:06:37.343826+00 | >> 5000611610 | 2016-01-28 16:06:38.843562+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:06:37.343826+00 | 0 | 00:00:09.201996 >> 2 | 3 | 5000611610 | 2016-01-28 >>16:06:37.343826+00 | >> 5000611609 | 2016-01-28 16:06:29.851545+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:06:27.341894+00 | 1 | 00:00:19.203928 >> 2 | 4 | 5000611610 | 2016-01-28 >>16:06:37.343826+00 | >> 5000611610 | 2016-01-28 16:06:38.710974+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:06:37.343826+00 | 0 | 00:00:09.201996 >> (3 rows) >> >> >> a...@ams-repl3.lga.netmgmt:~$ /a/third-party/postgresql/bin/psql -U >> ams_slony -d ams -c 'select * from _ams_cluster.sl_status' >> st_origin | st_received | st_last_event | st_last_event_ts >> | >> st_last_received | st_last_received_ts | >> st_last_received_event_ts | st_lag_num_events | st_lag_time >> >>-----------+-------------+---------------+------------------------------- >>+- >> >>-----------------+-------------------------------+----------------------- >>-- >> ------+-------------------+----------------- >> 3 | 4 | 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:05.493455+00 | >> 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 16:07:06.486539+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:05.493455+00 | 0 | 00:00:08.522529 >> 3 | 1 | 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:05.493455+00 | >> 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 16:07:08.040292+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:05.493455+00 | 0 | 00:00:08.522529 >> 3 | 2 | 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:05.493455+00 | >> 5000654642 | 2016-01-28 16:07:08.472049+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:05.493455+00 | 0 | 00:00:08.522529 >> (3 rows) >> >> >> a...@ams-repl4.blr.netmgmt:~$ /a/third-party/postgresql/bin/psql -U >> ams_slony -d ams -c 'select * from _ams_cluster.sl_status' >> st_origin | st_received | st_last_event | st_last_event_ts >> | >> st_last_received | st_last_received_ts | >> st_last_received_event_ts | st_lag_num_events | st_lag_time >> >>-----------+-------------+---------------+------------------------------- >>+- >> >>-----------------+-------------------------------+----------------------- >>-- >> ------+-------------------+----------------- >> 4 | 3 | 5000637483 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:32.698809+00 | >> 5000637482 | 2016-01-28 16:07:28.731404+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:22.695826+00 | 1 | 00:00:19.077657 >> 4 | 1 | 5000637483 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:32.698809+00 | >> 5000637482 | 2016-01-28 16:07:24.839978+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:22.695826+00 | 1 | 00:00:19.077657 >> 4 | 2 | 5000637483 | 2016-01-28 >>16:07:32.698809+00 | >> 5000637482 | 2016-01-28 16:07:22.926411+00 | 2016-01-28 >> 16:07:22.695826+00 | 1 | 00:00:19.077657 >> (3 rows) >> >> >> >> Tom :-) >> >> >> >> On 1/28/16, 10:38 AM, "Jan Wieck" <j...@wi3ck.info> wrote: >> >>>On 01/28/2016 08:30 AM, Tignor, Tom wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello slony folks, >>>> From my reading I¹m guessing (hoping) this isn¹t a new problem. I >>>>have >>>> a simple cluster with one provider replicating to three subscribers. >>>>The >>>> provider¹s changelog tables (sl_log_[1|2]) are fine, but the >>>>subscribers >>>> (with forwarding enabled) are all showing runaway growth. Looked >>>>through >>>> the FAQ and I don¹t see the node I dropped or any idle transactions as >>>> viable culprits. Are there other thoughts on the cause? Can I safely >>>> manually delete/truncate some/all of the changelog tables? These >>>> replicas are all leaf nodes. I only have forwarding turned on to allow >>>> for failover, and my replication rate is the 2 sec default. >>>> Thanks in advance for any insights. >>> >>>What is the output of the sl_status view "on those leaf nodes"? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> ams=# select >>>> pg_size_pretty(pg_total_relation_size('_ams_cluster.sl_log_1')); >>>> >>>> pg_size_pretty >>>> >>>> ---------------- >>>> >>>> 75 MB >>>> >>>> (1 row) >>>> >>>> >>>> ams=# select >>>> pg_size_pretty(pg_total_relation_size('_ams_cluster.sl_log_2')); >>>> >>>> pg_size_pretty >>>> >>>> ---------------- >>>> >>>> 34 GB >>>> >>>> (1 row) >>>> >>>> >>>> ams=# select * from _ams_cluster.sl_confirm where con_origin not in >>>> (select no_id from _ams_cluster.sl_node) or con_received not in >>>>(select >>>> no_id from _ams_cluster.sl_node); >>>> >>>> con_origin | con_received | con_seqno | con_timestamp >>>> >>>> ------------+--------------+-----------+--------------- >>>> >>>> (0 rows) >>>> >>>> >>>> ams=# select * from pg_stat_activity where current_query like >>>>'%IDLE%'; >>>> >>>> datid | datname | procpid | usesysid | usename | >>>> application_name | client_addr | client_hostname | >>>>client_port | >>>> backend_start | xact_start | >>>> query_start | waiting | >>>> >>>> current_query >>>> >>>> >>>>-------+---------+---------+----------+------------+------------------- >>>>-- >>>>------+----------------+-----------------+-------------+--------------- >>>>-- >>>>--------------+-------------------------------+------------------------ >>>>-- >>>>-----+---------+--- >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 2611 | 212995 | ams_viewer | >>>> | 88.221.209.10 | | 43328 | 2016-01-28 >>>> 12:24:49.706389+00 | | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:18:02.427848+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 12894 | 212995 | ams_viewer | >>>> | 88.221.209.10 | | 60112 | 2016-01-28 >>>> 12:47:26.230681+00 | | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:15:27.744242+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 12884 | 212995 | ams_viewer | >>>> | 88.221.209.10 | | 44302 | 2016-01-28 >>>> 12:47:25.100006+00 | | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:15:27.936059+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 23466 | 213867 | ams_slony | psql >>>> | | | -1 | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:11:32.030343+00 | 2016-01-28 13:18:37.283992+00 | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:18:37.283992+00 | f | se >>>> >>>> lect * from pg_stat_activity where current_query like '%IDLE%'; >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 6719 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_2_provider_2 | 60.254.150.133 | | >>>> 61806 | 2016-01-22 01:59:14.800129+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:25.935111+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 6718 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_3_provider_2 | 60.254.150.133 | | >>>> 61805 | 2016-01-22 01:59:14.797655+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:34.304475+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 5505 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_4_provider_2 | 80.67.75.105 | | >>>> 36477 | 2016-01-22 01:56:25.637046+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:36.1348+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 5504 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_3_provider_2 | 72.246.50.22 | | >>>> 51813 | 2016-01-22 01:56:25.240798+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:28.961629+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 5487 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_4_provider_2 | 72.246.50.22 | | >>>> 51803 | 2016-01-22 01:56:22.896388+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:35.858913+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 5047 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_2_provider_2 | 72.246.50.22 | | >>>> 51564 | 2016-01-22 01:55:23.600296+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:34.487192+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 5041 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.origin_2_provider_2 | 80.67.75.105 | | >>>> 36402 | 2016-01-22 01:55:22.964462+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:34.519066+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 6694 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.node_2_listen | 60.254.150.133 | | >>>> 61795 | 2016-01-22 01:59:12.095052+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:27.928384+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4456 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.node_2_listen | 72.246.50.22 | | >>>> 51238 | 2016-01-22 01:54:21.481355+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:36.766973+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4457 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.node_2_listen | 80.67.75.105 | | >>>> 36333 | 2016-01-22 01:54:21.500456+00 | >>>>| >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:36.204482+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4428 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.local_monitor | | | >>>> -1 | 2016-01-22 01:54:18.977015+00 | | >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:36.652567+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4427 | 213867 | ams_slony | slon.local_sync >>>> | | | -1 | 2016-01-22 >>>> 01:54:18.976932+00 | | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:18:36.151998+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4426 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.local_cleanup | | | >>>> -1 | 2016-01-22 01:54:18.976842+00 | | >>>> 2016-01-28 13:12:12.582921+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4425 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.remoteWorkerThread_4 | | | >>>> -1 | 2016-01-22 01:54:18.976783+00 | | >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:33.99715+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4420 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.remoteWorkerThread_1 | | | >>>> -1 | 2016-01-22 01:54:18.976548+00 | | >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:33.561531+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4419 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>> slon.remoteWorkerThread_3 | | | >>>> -1 | 2016-01-22 01:54:18.97647+00 | | >>>> 2016-01-28 13:18:34.808907+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> 16393 | ams | 4413 | 213867 | ams_slony | >>>>slon.local_listen >>>> | | | -1 | 2016-01-22 >>>> 01:54:18.965568+00 | | 2016-01-28 >>>> 13:18:37.096159+00 | f | <I >>>> >>>> DLE> >>>> >>>> (21 rows) >>>> >>>> >>>> ams=# >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Tom :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Slony1-general mailing list >>>> Slony1-general@lists.slony.info >>>> http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general >>>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Jan Wieck >>>Senior Software Engineer >>>http://slony.info >> > > >-- >Jan Wieck >Senior Software Engineer >http://slony.info _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list Slony1-general@lists.slony.info http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general