On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 12:06:41 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:30:19 +0530 Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > > > > On 7/5/07, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <adsmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 18:04:35 -0400 Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > > > > > > > Most likely it is worried about XID wraparound, and those are precisely > > > > > the tables that need urgent vacuumed because they haven't been vacuumed > > > > > in a long time. > > > > > > > > No, autovacuum is doing this with every run. Beside this, the database has > > > > only some 10k changes per day. The wraparound was my first idea, but i > > > > don't see a reason, why this should be happen with every autovacuum run. > > > > > > > Did you check freeze_max_age values in the pg_autovacuum table ? A very > > > small value can trigger XID wraparound related VACUUMs in every run. > > > > The value is '0' for all columns in all entries, except 'vacrelid' and 'enabled'. > > Can a VACUUM run happen, even if enabled is set to false? > > Huh, try putting -1 in all columns instead. 0 is a nasty value to have > in there. I haven't tested the effects but if freeze_max_age is 0 it > may be doing what Pavan says. Ok, did this. Will take a look, what autovacuum is doing now. Thanks for the help -- Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product. (Ferenc Mantfeld)
