Re: Vacuum explained -> Dangerous ? - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Gaetano Mendola
Subject Re: Vacuum explained -> Dangerous ?
Date
Msg-id avea6a$15ub$1@news.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuum explained  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Vacuum explained -> Dangerous ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-admin
"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in message
news:26423.1041885959@sss.pgh.pa.us...
> Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> > Tup = # of "rows" in your table
>
> Right.  This is the number of rows remaining after the vacuum, to be
> precise.
>
> > Keep = # of tuples that the db did not feel it could safely mark/remove
> > (probably envolved in some type of transaction)


NOTICE:  Pages 2518: Changed 38, Empty 0; Tup 75489: Vac 447, Keep 68661,
UnUsed 144574.

This mean that if a process do a "begin transaction" and stay there one
month without
activity all row delete or updated after that "begin transaction" remain
there for ever ?
If it's so, this is what is happening on my DB I have a pool of process (
for performance
sake) and some of this process are not working but the first thing done is:

SetAutoCommit( false );

if this start the transaction ( I'm going to investigate ) is a disaster!!!!

Some one have already experience on that ?


Ciao
Gaetano.



pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: "Senthil"
Date:
Subject: Re: Stored procedures doubts
Next
From: Alan Gutierrez
Date:
Subject: User Management