| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Oisin Glynn <me(at)oisinglynn(dot)com>, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM Question |
| Date: | 2006-01-26 20:44:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20060126204430.GA97564@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 02:35:42PM -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> If you really are just inserting, and never updating or deleting, then you
> will never need to vacuum the table, rather you will just need to ANALYSE
> the table.
That's not quite true; the table must still be vacuumed occasionally
to prevent transaction ID wraparound failure, else you risk losing
data.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/maintenance.html#VACUUM-FOR-WRAPAROUND
--
Michael Fuhr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bob Pawley | 2006-01-26 21:02:16 | Re: Arrays |
| Previous Message | Tino Wildenhain | 2006-01-26 20:30:42 | Re: Arrays |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-01-26 20:59:57 | Re: -X flag in pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2006-01-26 19:35:42 | Re: VACUUM Question |