| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
| Cc: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Kouber Saparev <postgresql(at)saparev(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Help me recovering data |
| Date: | 2005-02-16 18:08:58 |
| Message-ID: | 25760.1108577338@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> I don't think there is much point in making it configurable. If they knew
> to do that they would most likely know to vacuum as well.
Agreed.
> However, 100K out of 1G seems too small. Just to get wrap around there
> must be a pretty high transaction rate, so 100K may not give much warning.
> 1M or 10M seem to be better.
Good point. Even 10M is less than 1% of the ID space. Dunno about you,
but the last couple cars I've owned start flashing warnings when the gas
tank is about 20% full, not 1% full...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-16 18:54:28 | Re: Strange RETURN NEXT behaviour in Postgres 8.0 |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-02-16 18:08:26 | Re: Help me recovering data |