On 10.11.2011 11:26, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
John R Pierce schrieb:
On 11/09/11 11:46 PM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
Lossing data is very bad, the solution provided by Robert is really
simple. I support Roberts approach.
you support changing localhost to be something other than 127.0.0.1 to
hack around a poorly designed application?!? seriously?
No, i support that PG should be able to not lossing data because of an
easily catchable missconfiguration of the underlying system.
You won't lose data. There are safeguards in place to print warnings in
the log when you approach transaction wrap-around, and after a certain
point the system will stop accepting new transactions, to prevent data loss.
If autovacuum is not working and you're not doing manual vacuums, you
will likely have an extremely bloted database anyway, before you reach
wrap-around.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
