Problem has now been solved. Thanks a lot for all your help.
On 5/12/08, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "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 >
