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

Re: [HACKERS] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2
Date: 2006-06-29 08:39:27
Message-ID: 1151570367.2691.1964.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 20:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> In fact, maybe we should just force an autovac cycle for any DB that
> appears to be approaching wraparound, rather than waiting for the
> shutdown-before-wraparound code to kick in.  Getting into that state
> amounts to whacking DBAs upside the head for being stupid, which
> doesn't really win us any friends ...

Yes, please can we have the auto autovacuum cut in rather than the
wraparound message? I'd rather have them complain that we did this, than
complain that we didn't.

Normally, I wouldn't support automatically starting admin tasks without
thr sysadmins knowledge.  

  Simon Riggs             

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SDDate: 2006-06-29 08:44:49
Subject: Re: Single Index Tuple Chain (SITC) method
Previous:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2006-06-29 07:30:30
Subject: Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-06-29 20:37:36
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-06-29 00:08:21
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group