| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | CR Lender <crlender(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_get_last_vacuum_time(): why non-FULL? |
| Date: | 2013-03-28 19:44:44 |
| Message-ID: | 1364499884.79270.YahooMailNeo@web162906.mail.bf1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
CR Lender <crlender(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The database is running on PostgreSQL 8.3.6.
> I've read the manual more carefully now, and I can't see any mention of
> what VACUUM does that VACUUM FULL does not. The point about extreme
> maintainance is taken, but from what I read, VACUUM FULL should include
> everything a normal VACUUM does.
Prior to release 9.0 that is probably true. Sorry for not asking
about the version first. But you should read this page:
http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
8.3 is out of support now. Even for the 8.3 release, 8.3.6 is
missing over four years of fixes for bugs and security
vulnerabilities. There is a very good chance that any problem you
see already fixed and you are just choosing to run without the fix.
--
Kevin Grittner
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Flower | 2013-03-28 19:47:12 | Re: Understanding behavior of SELECT with multiple unnested columns |
| Previous Message | CR Lender | 2013-03-28 19:19:49 | Re: pg_stat_get_last_vacuum_time(): why non-FULL? |