From: | Harry <postituk(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Database Recovery |
Date: | 2004-12-20 01:08:42 |
Message-ID: | 20041220010842.24421.qmail@web50404.mail.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
--- Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> wrote:
> > http://www.hjackson.org/blog/archives/2004/12/postgresql_data.html
>
> Huh, this sounds like transaction Id wraparound to me. Do you
> regularly run vacuums on the whole database? Did you ask for expert
> help on the lists before running to do whatever you did?
I didn't run to do anything ;) I had a good think and a good google
before I done anything and I have all my data back because of it.
Luckily for me the data was neither life or job threatening so I was
able to take a few more risks than necessary. I was actually
volunteering to write the database recovery section of the docs, not
asking for help.
As per TID wraparound. I have been lucky enough never to have received
anything similar to the following warning (taken from 7.4 docs)
play=# vacuum;
WARNING: Some databases have not been vacuumed in 1613770184
transactions.
Better vacuum them within 533713463 transactions,
or you may have a wraparound failure.
VACUUM
you will also notice that I used a TID of less than 100 million to
recover the database. I was nowhere near 0.5 billion as recommended by
the docs.
Harry
=====
Harry
Join team plico.
http://www.hjackson.org/cgi-bin/folding/index.pl
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Harry | 2004-12-20 01:29:51 | Re: Database Recovery |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-20 00:52:25 | Re: Database Recovery |