Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kuba Ouhrabka
Тема Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again)
Дата
Msg-id cmdjh6$e4s$1@news.hub.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

> I think it's most likely that there were also old transactions in the
> current database.  Only the shared tables (pg_shadow, pg_database,
> pg_group) are vacuumed using a cutoff that depends on non-local
> transactions.

in my case, there are really no old transactions in current database.

> Looking at the back versions, it appears this logic was put in in 7.2;
> is it possible you are remembering the behavior of older versions?

And it's on 7.4...

The problem is fully described in thread I mentioned earlier, Tom's 
excellent explanation can be found here:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=cs&lr=&frame=right&th=5227028cb3449572&seekm=11390.1080964720%40sss.pgh.pa.us#link14

Kuba


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: plans for bitmap indexes?
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Vacuum and oldest xmin (again)