"James Farrugia" <james(dot)farrugia(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> One last thing...can we run into data-loss problems with successfully
> vacuumed tables even if there is one unvacuumed database object; what would
> have happened if I ignored to vacuum that rogue pg_toast (which was the only
> unvacuumed object within the entire database)?
The database would have shut down when you got to the
2-billion-transactions mark. So you'd have had to solve the problem
sooner or later anyway.
regards, tom lane