| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Oisin Glynn <me(at)oisinglynn(dot)com>, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM Question |
| Date: | 2006-01-26 21:41:32 |
| Message-ID: | 24593.1138311692@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> 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,
Also, somebody made a real good point about rolled-back insertions.
Even if the only command you ever apply to the table is INSERT, you
could still have dead rows in the table if some of those transactions
occasionally roll back.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-26 21:44:49 | Re: "xmin" system column |
| Previous Message | Eric B. Ridge | 2006-01-26 21:19:34 | "xmin" system column |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-01-26 22:04:50 | Re: Cleaning up the INET/CIDR mess |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-26 21:37:27 | Re: Cleaning up the INET/CIDR mess |