Re: pg_autovacuum and VACUUM FREEZE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_autovacuum and VACUUM FREEZE
Date
Msg-id 18950.1066313622@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_autovacuum and VACUUM FREEZE  ("Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes:
> The vacuum man page says, "FREEZE is not recommnded for routine use". 
> That was enough to keep me away.  However if vacuum freeze was
> considerably lighter than normal database wide vacuums then there might
> be an advantage to using it.

If anything it would be slower than normal vacuum (more pages touched).
I concur with just using plain VACUUM to deal with impending wraparound.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_autovacuum and VACUUM FREEZE
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS