From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce McAlister <bruce(dot)mcalister(at)blueface(dot)ie> |
Cc: | General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: AutoVacuum Behaviour Question |
Date: | 2007-06-27 22:52:13 |
Message-ID: | 20070627225213.GD28580@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > How much is the age decremented by on a vacuum run then?
>
> It should be decremented to the vacuum_freeze_min_age. However, I'm
> running some experiments with your settings and apparently it's not
> working as it should.
Nah, false alarm, it's working as expected for me. And I see the age of
databases being correctly decreased to the freeze min age (plus however
many transactions it took to do the vacuuming work). So I'm still at a
loss on why is it failing to advance the datfrozenxid of your database.
Please let me have a look at this query result while connected to that
database:
select relname, relfrozenxid from pg_class where relkind in ('r', 't');
You can change the relname to oid if showing the table names is
problematic for you.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
Al principio era UNIX, y UNIX habló y dijo: "Hello world\n".
No dijo "Hello New Jersey\n", ni "Hello USA\n".
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-06-27 22:54:14 | Re: autovacumm not working ? |
Previous Message | Tomasz Rakowski | 2007-06-27 22:46:06 | Re: autovacumm not working ? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-28 00:36:54 | Re: todo: Hash index creation |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-06-27 21:57:47 | Re: Bgwriter LRU cleaning: we've been going at this all wrong |