| From: | Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, Igor Chudov <ichudov(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |
| Date: | 2011-09-12 20:55:43 |
| Message-ID: | 4E6E71CF.3020709@peak6.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 09/12/2011 03:44 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> The PostgreSQL team works REALLY hard to prevent any kind of
> corruption scenario from rearing its ugly head, so when the word
> corruption pops up I start to wonder about the system (hardware
> wise) someone is using,
You've apparently never used early versions of EnterpriseDB. ;)
Kidding aside, it's apparently been a while since I read that particular
part of the manual. The error I *was* familiar with was from the 8.0 manual:
"WARNING: some databases have not been vacuumed in 1613770184 transactions
HINT: Better vacuum them within 533713463 transactions, or you may have
a wraparound failure."
Ever since the early days, I've been so paranoid about regular
vacuuming, I'm probably still a little overcautious.
So, my bad. Having a database down for a few hours isn't exactly
desirable, but it's certainly not corruption. :)
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 800 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email-disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-09-12 20:58:51 | Re: Allow sorts to use more available memory |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-09-12 20:44:44 | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |