| From: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |
| Date: | 2025-07-17 23:29:37 |
| Message-ID: | CANzqJaA6SPoy7ozSH3RQfJkRF1VTVwOYPmiBqH3p3cSb51tPng@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 6:26 PM David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thursday, July 17, 2025, 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?
>>
>
> It effectively resets the pseudo-counter(s) that autovacuum uses to
> determine when next it should perform an aggressive scan. Or, put
> differently, it does exactly what autovacuum would do when the
> pseudo-counter(s) hit their thresholds. The act of doing that thing
> effectively resets said counters to zero at that moment (absent concurrent
> activity).
>
That seems to be what I said. Or am I still missing something?
--
Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce.
Don't boil me, I'm still alive.
<Redacted> lobster!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rui DeSousa | 2025-07-18 01:13:58 | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-07-17 22:26:57 | Re: VACUUM FREEZE vs plain VACUUM |