| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: questions about wraparound |
| Date: | 2021-03-29 09:14:21 |
| Message-ID: | cc34a3095495373f23237c9ab377a9101743bc0f.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2021-03-29 at 10:33 +0200, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> Another thing that comes into my mind as a doubt is: why are all
> databases becoming old? I mean, I'm provoking activity _only_ on
> testdb, therefore other database such as template1 are not doing
> anything.
That one I can answer.
If there is no activity on a database, its "datfrozenxid" stays
the same. So, as transaction IDs are consumed, it is getting older
automatically. That means that even inactive databases will receive
an anti-wraparound vacuum occasionally. But that should not have
to do anything except advance "datfrozenxid".
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Luca Ferrari | 2021-03-29 14:58:24 | Re: questions about wraparound |
| Previous Message | Luca Ferrari | 2021-03-29 08:33:15 | Re: questions about wraparound |