On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 09:35:56PM +0100, Gavin Hamill wrote: > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 14:17:29 -0500 > "Jim C. Nasby" <jim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Are you sure that there's nothing else happening on the machine that > > could affect the vacuum times? Like, say a backup? Or perhaps updates > > coming in from Slony that didn't used to be there? > > I'm absolutely certain. The backups run from only one slave, given that > it is a full copy of node 1. Our overnight traffic has not increased > any, and the nightly backups show that the overall size of the DB has > not increased more than usual growth. > > Plus, I have fairly verbose logging, and it's not showing anything out > of the ordinary. > > Like I said, it's one of those awful hypothesis/hand-waving problems :) Well, the fact that it's happening on all your nodes leads me to think Slony is somehow involved. Perhaps it suddenly decided to change how often it's issuing syncs? I know it issues vacuums as well, so maybe that's got something to do with it... (though I'm guessing you've already looked in pg_stat_activity/logs to see if anything correlates...) Still, it might be worth asking about this on the slony list... -- Jim Nasby jim@xxxxxxxxx EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
