Recycled Log Files

[Naomi Walker]

We are running Postgres 7.3.4 on Solaris 6 on an E3500. I noticed the
following messages, and attempted to remedy the situation by upping our
wal_buffers to 64, thinking we might need more room. wal_files seems to
have gone away in this version or I would have increased that as well.

I'm still seeing the same thing in the logs. Show all in psql shows
wal_beffers has been increased.

Is this even a problem? If so, which know do I really need to tweak?

Thank you,
Naomi




2004-02-05 16:48:16 LOG: recycled transaction log file 0000000600000029
2004-02-05 16:48:27 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002A
2004-02-05 16:48:27 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002B
2004-02-05 16:48:27 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002C
2004-02-05 16:48:38 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002D
2004-02-05 16:48:38 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002E
2004-02-05 16:48:38 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002F


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naomi Walker Chief Information Officer
Eldorado Computing, Inc.
***@eldocomp.com 602-604-3100
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forget past mistakes. Forget failures. Forget everything except what you're
going to do now and do it.
- William Durant, founder of General Motors
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE --

This message is intended for the sole use of the individual and entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended addressee, nor authorized to receive for the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, disclose or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email, and delete the message. Thank you.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ***@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Andrew Sullivan]

Post by Naomi Walker
We are running Postgres 7.3.4 on Solaris 6 on an E3500. I noticed the
following messages, and attempted to remedy the situation by upping our
wal_buffers to 64, thinking we might need more room. wal_files seems to
have gone away in this version or I would have increased that as well.

Actually, this is a good thing: it means the logs are getting cleared
and available for re-use. But what I'm wondering is why you're going
through them so fast. What are you doing in this period?

A

[Tom Lane]

Post by Naomi Walker
We are running Postgres 7.3.4 on Solaris 6 on an E3500. I noticed the
following messages, and attempted to remedy the situation by upping our
wal_buffers to 64, thinking we might need more room.
2004-02-05 16:48:16 LOG: recycled transaction log file 0000000600000029
2004-02-05 16:48:27 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002A
2004-02-05 16:48:27 LOG: recycled transaction log file 000000060000002B

This is normal operation. I'm not sure why we have it as LOG level and
not DEBUG-something. I suppose the messages are slightly useful to give
an idea of how fast you are using up log segments, but now that
wal_files isn't a separately tweakable parameter it's not obvious why
the average DBA would care.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend