Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Scott Marlowe
Тема Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?
Дата
Msg-id AANLkTik++ug_RYscONWu8xfBHR9438YyryvvbMcs0nS0@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?  (John Lister <john.lister@kickstone.com>)
Список pgsql-admin
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:27 AM, John Lister <john.lister@kickstone.com> wrote:
> Instead I tried to vacuum them, but this didn't make any difference (or
> indeed do anything), so in the end I deleted the tables manually instead,
> which instantly reset the transaction count back to the 1billion mark.  I
> now need to find out which process probably died due to its temp tables
> disappearing, again they appeared odd - single alphabetical names - which I
> wasn't expecting...
>
> Was this expected behaviour with temporary tables?

It's more expected behavior when you have long running transactions.
I haven't seen it caused by temp tables.  Was the parent process in a
really long transaction or just open a long time without one?

В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "John Lister"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?
Следующее
От: "John Lister"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?