yhe wrote > From looking at the log, [...] Any reason not to share it with the people from whom you are asking for help? > I was thinking that autovacuum should only happen on updated table so it > should only autovacuum on one child and not the others for my case. At the point of "stop usage" on the partition it would still want at least one more cleanup vacuum; and eventually would want a FREEZE pass as well. Furthermore, the parent of the partition scheme still needs to be aware of the children and so you might be seeing that. David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/autovacuum-with-inheritance-tp5829450p5829461.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
