| From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | German Becker <german(dot)becker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence |
| Date: | 2013-05-24 15:46:39 |
| Message-ID: | CA+HiwqGVmO-DJGwj0zJRnnNhpxYJsmDgoLB59QGXckhq8Y0+oQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I didn't quite understand what you mean by that... But anyways so do you
> people think this sequence number overlap is "normal" ?
There is "no overlap" at all. The newer segments that you see are
"pre-allocated" ones. They have not been written to yet.
From the "ls -l pg_xlog" output that you sent, it can be seen that
segments starting from 000000010000000E000000A8 through
00000001000000100000007E have been pre-allocated (at that point of
time) and 000000010000000E000000A7 is currently being written to. Just
look at the modified times in your "ls -l" listing.
000000010000000E000000A7 has May 22 15:32 (the latest writes seem to
have happened to this segment) whereas pre-allocated ones seem to have
around May 22 12:05 to 12:15 (which are yet to be written to).
Does that help?
--
Amit Langote
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-05-24 15:52:19 | Re: getting rid of freezing |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-05-24 15:29:10 | Re: getting rid of freezing |