| From: | Rui DeSousa <rui(dot)desousa(at)icloud(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |
| Date: | 2025-07-18 01:13:58 |
| Message-ID: | 13815633-5376-4DED-9043-E14C88B1B71E@icloud.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> On Jul 17, 2025, at 6:03 PM, Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> Does VACUUM FREEZE do something extra or special than to defer autovacuum for an extra 50,000,000 transactions?
>
Yes. Vacuum freeze removes the xmin on tuples that no longer need it. i.e. The xmin is not required by any other in-flight transaction.
I don’t know what you mean by defer auto vacuum. Vacuum freeze is a mechanism to recycle transaction ids; not to initiate an auto vacuum.
It sounds like you have autovacuum_freeze_max_age set too low for your environment.
i.e. Here is what I currently use:
autovacuum_freeze_max_age=800000000
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-07-18 01:23:23 | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2025-07-17 23:29:37 | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |