| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Shane Wright <shane(dot)wright(at)edigitalresearch(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: recovery from xid wraparound |
| Date: | 2006-10-24 14:08:23 |
| Message-ID: | 8303.1161698903@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> A VACUUM will recover any data that slipped beyond the horizon less
> than 1 billion transactions ago, which I think covers you completely.
> The only issue is that unique indexes may be confused because new
> conflicting data may have been inserted while the old data was
> invisible. Only you can say if that's going to be an issue.
I don't think there's a risk there. Uniqueness checks use SnapshotDirty
so they aren't time-sensitive.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-24 14:23:19 | Re: recovery from xid wraparound |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2006-10-24 14:00:31 | Re: postgres under Suse linux |