ddgs wrote:
> Is it a good starting point to the basic reason of doing vacuum?
> from the manual,
> "PostgreSQL's VACUUM command must be run on a regular basis for
> several reasons:
> To recover disk space occupied by updated or deleted rows.
> To update data statistics used by the PostgreSQL q
Is it a good starting point to the basic reason of doing vacuum?
from the manual,
"PostgreSQL's VACUUM command must be run on a regular basis for several
reasons:
To recover disk space occupied by updated or deleted rows.
To update data statistics used by the PostgreSQL query planner.
To protect ag
ddgs wrote:
> It is just a simple idea syntax, not the exact one.
Then it doesn't seem possible to give an exact answer as to what it
will do. The effect on transaction IDs will depend on whether
you're talking about one DELETE statement with a range of values in
the WHERE clause or a series
It is just a simple idea syntax, not the exact one.
Anyway, I am wonder how to get the 2^31 transaction IDs to cause the failure
But I get the wraparound error warning when I delete a large no. of rows.
So the wraparound failure is due to what reason, that I still have no idea
(at least not the tr
ddgs wrote:
> It is a discussion about the transaction ID wraparound in
> PostgreSQL.
Hopefully you've seen this:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/routine-vacuuming.html#VACUUM-FOR-WRAPAROUND
> However, what is the fundamental definition if transaction ID.
As the cited page
It is a discussion about the transaction ID wraparound in PostgreSQL.
However, what is the fundamental definition if transaction ID.
select * from table where ID=1:1
it is consider as one transaction or 1 transactions.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabbl
