Re: Is Vacuum Working ?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Thorne, Francis" <thornef(at)cromwell(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is Vacuum Working ?
Date: 2009-09-04 15:01:19
Message-ID: 15866.1252076479@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

"Thorne, Francis" <thornef(at)cromwell(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> Information in Log file after database restart

> 01/08/2009 - Next Transaction ID = 1400435363
> 01/09/2009 - Next Transaction ID = 1462025864

> Transaction_ID Wrapwround limit is 214784146 limited by database
> postgres

> Is this normal, I would have thought the transactional ID would have
> stayed roughly the same due to vacuum ? If this keeps increasing will it
> mean I am getting to close my 2 billion transaction limit ?

Yeah, this looks perfectly normal. VACUUM doesn't make the next-XID
counter go backwards. What it will do from time to time is push out the
wraparound limit (by "freezing" very old rows' XID numbers). As long as
there's a few million transactions' worth of daylight between the wrap
limit and current XIDs, there's nothing to worry about.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lee, Mija 2009-09-04 16:32:59 Re: postgres processes not reflected in pg_stat_activity
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-09-04 14:56:08 Re: Vacuum Error - Relation Deleted while still in use