On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
> If autovac is properly configured, very few, if any, PostgreSQL
> databases need routine vacuuming jobs. However, other than sleep
> states making it run slower, autovacuum is no different than a regular
> old vacuum. Are you sure this wasn't a vacuum full, which is almost
> never a desired operation to be regularly scheduled?
I'm sure it wasn't a full vacuum. I almost never do those and when I
do, I have to schedule downtime.
I think another process got hung up somewhere and couldn't release its
lock on the table in question, and there were several other processes
waiting. It's possible that it was just a symptom of a larger problem
at the time. I didn't have time to do a thorough analysis (and the
problem state is lost now), and what was cause vs. effect is probably
immaterial at this point.
Peter