Re: transaction ID wraparound - should I use 'VACUUM' or 'VACUUM FULL' ?

On 10 Paź, 04:38, t(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvhe(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Michal Szymanski wrote:
> >> In old version of Postgres we have to execute 'VACUUM FULL' to solve
> >> problem of  transaction ID wraparound, do we need to execute 'VACUUM
> >> FULL' in Postgres 8.3 or 8.4 to avoid this problem?
> > No, plain VACUUM suffices.
>
> Just to clarify: plain VACUUM has always sufficed; in *no* version of
> Postgres has it ever been the case that VACUUM FULL was more useful
> than VACUUM to protect against wraparound.
>
>                         regards, tom lane

For me it was clear that plain VACUUM is enough but my friend had
situation when wraparound happend when he used plain vaccum after
'vacuum full' prblem was solved. I will change our vacuum full to
plain vacuum and we will see what happen.

Regards
Michal Szymanski