| From: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Lic(dot) Martin Marques" <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: solving wraparound |
| Date: | 2005-12-31 15:34:51 |
| Message-ID: | 43B6A51B.10807@zeut.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Jaime Casanova wrote:
>> But if VACUUM fixes the wraparound issue, shouldn't even a badly
>> configured autovacuum make the wraparound not be a problem in 8.1? Or did
>> I miss understand how this works?
>>
> but you can disable autovacuum (i do not why you can do something like
> that but i guess someone will have a good reason)... actually it comes
> off by default in all distros i have seen but windows...
Anyone think it might be reasonable to add a GUC option that tells
autovacuum to monitor for wraparound only, and not for more general
usage based vacuuming? Something like autovac_wraparound_only. Not
sure I like the idea, but thought it might be worth some discussion.
Matt
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karsten Hilbert | 2005-12-31 16:18:19 | Re: I want to know how to improve the security of postgresql |
| Previous Message | Reko Turja | 2005-12-31 11:57:36 | Re: Forum Software |