Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Data Bases > Pgsql Hackers > Re: the un-vacu...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 11 of 16 Topic 9559 of 11009
Post > Topic >>

Re: the un-vacuumable table

by andrew.george.hammond@[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Andrew Hammond") Jul 3, 2008 at 10:57 PM

On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Andrew Hammond" <andrew.george.hammond@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> The whole thing is pretty mystifying, especially the ENOSPC write
>>> failure on what seems like it couldn't have been a full disk.
>
>> Yes, I've passed along the task of explaining why PG thought the disk
>> was full to the sysadmin responsible for the box. I'll post the answer
>> here, when and if we have one.
>
> I just noticed something even more mystifying: you said that the ENOSPC
> error occurred once a day during vacuuming.

Actually, the ENOSPC happened once. After that first error, we got

vacuumdb: vacuuming of database "adecndb" failed: ERROR:  failed to
re-find parent key in "ledgerdetail_2008_03_idx2" for deletion target
page 64767

repeatedly.

> That doesn't make any
> sense, because a write error would leave the shared buffer still marked
> dirty, and so the next checkpoint would try to write it again.  If
> there's a persistent write error on a particular block, you should see
> it being complained of at least once per checkpoint interval.
>
> If you didn't see that, it suggests that the ENOSPC was transient,
> which isn't unreasonable --- but why would it recur for the exact
> same block each night?
>
> Have you looked into the machine's kernel log to see if there is any
> evidence of low-level distress (hardware or filesystem level)?  I'm
> wondering if ENOSPC is being re****ted because it is the closest
> available errno code, but the real problem is something different than
> the error message text suggests.  Other than the errno the symptoms
> all look quite a bit like a bad-sector problem ...

I will pass this along to the sysadmin in charge of this box.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
 




 16 Posts in Topic:
the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-06-25 00:40:35 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
heikki@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-06-25 12:58:04 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-06-25 09:57:55 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-06-27 16:31:05 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-06-27 23:14:36 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-06-30 19:20:50 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-03 13:42:30 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-07-03 17:35:23 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-03 15:16:32 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-07-03 18:47:51 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-03 22:57:36 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
stark@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-07-04 09:20:59 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-07 12:00:12 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-07-07 15:33:10 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-07 14:08:03 
Re: the un-vacuumable table
andrew.george.hammond@[EM  2008-07-07 15:04:47 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Fri Dec 5 8:22:45 CST 2008.