Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
- Cc: Shane Wright <shane(dot)wright(at)edigitalresearch(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:08:23 -0400
- Message-id: <8303(dot)1161698903(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes: > A VACUUM will recover any data that slipped beyond the horizon less > than 1 billion transactions ago, which I think covers you completely. > The only issue is that unique indexes may be confused because new > conflicting data may have been inserted while the old data was > invisible. Only you can say if that's going to be an issue. I don't think there's a risk there. Uniqueness checks use SnapshotDirty so they aren't time-sensitive. regards, tom lane
- References:
- recovery from xid wraparound
- From: Shane Wright
- Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- From: Martijn van Oosterhout
- recovery from xid wraparound
- Prev by Date: Re: postgres under Suse linux
- Next by Date: Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- Previous by thread: Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- Next by thread: Re: recovery from xid wraparound
- Indexes: