From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade - link mode and transaction-wraparound data loss |
Date: | 2010-05-18 20:17:51 |
Message-ID: | 201005182017.o4IKHp325194@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc wrote:
> First the new one..
>
> jk(at)pal:~$ psql -p 5433
> psql (9.0beta1)
> Type "help" for help.
>
> data=# SELECT datname, datfrozenxid FROM pg_database;
> datname | datfrozenxid
> -----------+--------------
> template0 | 654
> postgres | 2374592801
> data | 2023782337
> jk | 2023822188
> template1 | 2374592801
> workqueue | 2023822188
> (6 rows)
>
> data=# SELECT txid_current();
> txid_current
> --------------
> 2375384556
> (1 row)
I just ran a test and all the datfrozenxids are less than the current
xid, so the only database that could be generating a wraparound warning
is 'template0'. But, again, I though that template0 was not touched for
wraparound protection --- I am starting to think I am wrong.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-05-18 20:20:17 | Re: pg_upgrade - link mode and transaction-wraparound data loss |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-05-18 20:03:38 | Re: Synchronous replication patch built on SR |