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

From Simon Elbaz
Subject Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account
Date
Msg-id CAPOUM=e585GWHrhx4GxJnoOC3jrF4_Nks2hrNju-ORCtbxquAg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
I ran vacuum without the freeze option as you can see below.

Simon

On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 12:01 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
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: PG16devel - vacuum_freeze_table_age seems not being taken into account
Next
From: Conner Bean
Date:
Subject: Re: Dropping behavior for unique CONSTRAINTs