Re: vacuum confusion - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Richard Huxton
Subject Re: vacuum confusion
Date
Msg-id 420C82A2.8090201@archonet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: vacuum confusion  (John Sidney-Woollett <johnsw@wardbrook.com>)
Responses Re: vacuum confusion  (John Sidney-Woollett <johnsw@wardbrook.com>)
Re: vacuum confusion  (John Sidney-Woollett <johnsw@wardbrook.com>)
List pgsql-general
John Sidney-Woollett wrote:
> Ah.., no we're not vacuuming template0 or 1.
>
> I didn't realise that the transaction ID would be stored here - I
> assumed that they'd be in our database.
>
> Do I need to need to (plain) vacuum, or vacuum full these template0 and
> template1? And is this something that can be done once a week rather
> than every night (like our main database)?

Ah! Found the section of the manuals - see "Routine Database Maintenance
Tasks" for details.

AFAIK it's a simple vacuum and once a week is more than enough. The
manual recommends once every 500million transactions, though you can
leave it longer.

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: John Sidney-Woollett
Date:
Subject: Re: vacuum confusion
Next
From: "Bruno Almeida do Lago"
Date:
Subject: PostgreSQL Features