Re: Transaction ID wraparound: problem and proposed solution - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jan Wieck
Subject Re: Transaction ID wraparound: problem and proposed solution
Date
Msg-id 200011071930.OAA01047@jupiter.jw.home
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Transaction ID wraparound: problem and proposed solution  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
> > Required frequency of *successful* vacuum over *all* tables.
> > We would have to remember something in pg_class/pg_database
> > and somehow force vacuum over "too-long-unvacuumed-tables"
> > *automatically*.
>
> I don't think this is a problem now; in practice you couldn't possibly
> go for half a billion transactions without vacuuming, I'd think.
   ISTM you forgot that the XID counter (and usage) is global.
   You  need  to  have  *any*  table  of  *any*  database in the   instance vacuumed before you are sure. Some
low-traffic DB's   might not get vacuumed for years (for example template1).
 


Jan

--

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




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hiroshi Inoue
Date:
Subject: Re: Issue NOTICE for attempt to raise lock level?
Next
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1