On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 3:25 PM, ITAGAKI Takahiro
<itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
>
> Sounds cool. I recommended users to do VACUUM FREEZE just after initial
> loading, but we can avoid it with your method.
>
Yeah, and the additional step of VACUUM FREEZE adds up to the restore
time.
>
> To make things worse, the freezing day comes at once because the first restore
> is done in a single or near transactions; The wraparound timings of many
> tables are aligned at the same time. Freezing copy will be the solution.
>
If we can start with a freezed table and even if the table is
subsequently updated,
hopefully DSM (or something of that sort) will help us reduce the vacuum freeze
time whenever its required.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
