Heikki Linnakangas schrieb:
>>>> Lossing data is very bad, the solution provided by Robert is really
>>>> simple. I support Roberts approach.
>>>
>>> you support changing localhost to be something other than 127.0.0.1 to
>>> hack around a poorly designed application?!? seriously?
>>
>> No, i support that PG should be able to not lossing data because of an
>> easily catchable missconfiguration of the underlying system.
>
> You won't lose data. There are safeguards in place to print warnings in
> the log when you approach transaction wrap-around, and after a certain
> point the system will stop accepting new transactions, to prevent data
> loss.
The manual says that autovacuum protects againt loss of very old data:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/routine-vacuuming.html
So either your statement is wrong or the manual. ;) If there is the
possibility to lose data just because of this kind of missconfiguration,
we should accept Roberts patch.
Greetings,
Torsten
--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query-Ergebnisse
auswerten kann.
