On 11/2/2004 12:07 PM, Ed L. wrote:

> On Tuesday November 2 2004 10:05, Ed L. wrote:
>> On Tuesday November 2 2004 6:15, Jan Wieck wrote:
>> > On 11/2/2004 1:08 AM, Ed L. wrote:
>> > > I have a 2-node master-slave replication set up with 1.0.5.  It's
>> > > been running for a couple days.  The sl_seqlog table is now 75MB.  Is
>> > > this expected?  How much larger will it grow?  What causes it to get
>> > > cleaned up?
>> >
>> > The cleanup is of course done in src/slon/cleanup_thread.c including
>> > the vacuuming. Slon never issues a full vacuum, so shrinking of any
>> > related tables will only happen ever if you configured a sufficient
>> > freespace map and that results in free blocks at the end of the
>> > relation for successive vacuum cycles, which happen every 10 minutes.
>>
>> I don't think this is a purely vacuum issue, though that could be part of
>> it.  I neglected to mention the table has 62,000 rows.  I guess my
>> question is who is supposed to delete these and when?  I couldn't find it
>> in the code other than during drop sequence.
> 
> Ah, my apologies, I see it in the code you mention now.  Still wondering why 
> the delete isn't happening.  I'll look at the code, but any tips are 
> appreciated.

Only those sl_log_1 and sl_seqlog rows that correspond to sl_event SYNC 
entries that are deleted get deleted. Only events that are confirmed by 
all nodes and older than 10 minutes are deleted.


Jan

-- 
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck at Yahoo.com #