Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: documention wrong or just not clear?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: documention wrong or just not clear?
Date: 2007-03-22 21:29:08
Message-ID: 27493.1174598948@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> In http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/routine-vacuuming.html it says:
> "The age column measures the number of transactions from the cutoff XID to the 
> current transaction's XID. Immediately after a VACUUM, age(relfrozenxid) 
> should be a little more than the vacuum_freeze_min_age setting that was used 
> (more by the number of transactions started since the VACUUM started). "

> However my results don't seem to bear that out:

I would imagine that your database (or at least some of your tables) are
not yet vacuum_freeze_min_age transactions old.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Ray StellDate: 2007-03-23 18:16:26
Subject: no verification of client certificate?
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2007-03-22 21:15:20
Subject: documention wrong or just not clear?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group