"James Farrugia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One last thing...can we run into data-loss problems with successfully
> vacuumed tables even if there is one unvacuumed database object; what would
> have happened if I ignored to vacuum that rogue pg_toast (which was the only
> unvacuumed object within the entire database)?

The database would have shut down when you got to the
2-billion-transactions mark.  So you'd have had to solve the problem
sooner or later anyway.

                        regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin

Reply via email to