Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David Rowley
Subject Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvocc+Jaz9X2G0Uzxhbc5GN1Okdx3hg+wN1YFxm95H5wtQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account  (Simon Elbaz <elbazsimon9@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account  (Simon Elbaz <elbazsimon9@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 at 23:43, Simon Elbaz <elbazsimon9@gmail.com> wrote:
> hydrodb=# SELECT c.oid::regclass as table_name,
>        greatest(age(c.relfrozenxid),age(t.relfrozenxid)) as age
> FROM pg_class c
> LEFT JOIN pg_class t ON c.reltoastrelid = t.oid
> WHERE c.relkind IN ('r', 'm') and c.relname='test';
>  table_name | age
> ------------+-----
>  test       |  51
> (1 ligne)
>
> I expected it not to be processed by vacuum freeze.
> However it has been entirely frozen.

You may have missed the wording in the docs about the FREEZE option.
"Specifying FREEZE is equivalent to performing VACUUM with the
vacuum_freeze_min_age and vacuum_freeze_table_age parameters set to
zero." [0]

David

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-vacuum.html



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Dropping behavior for unique CONSTRAINTs
Next
From: Simon Elbaz
Date:
Subject: Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account