| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>, "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 19:35:47 |
| Message-ID: | 43B6DD93.1000608@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> 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.
I believe 8.1 will actually stop allowing transactions if a wraparound
is going to occur.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Matt
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-31 20:09:23 | Re: How to read wal? |
| Previous Message | Pamela | 2005-12-31 18:25:55 | FW: new beginner to postgresql. Looking at it for a church |