http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/maintenance.html#VACUUM-FOR-WRAPAROUND
XID is transcation ID?
so, "select * from mydb" is a transcation?
if i executed "select * from mydb" twice, the XID wil be increased by 2
or ,just the "update","delete" command can be counted
--
View this mes
I'm looking for someone to help me understand the
tradeoffs/alternatives/problems for high-availability on MS Windows
clusters. Willing to do it on this emaillist, but if that is too much
traffic, can go direct email or phone.
I'm not actually the end-user/DBA for the task. I'm (among other
t
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 05:48:14PM -0800, ivan.hou wrote:
>
> XID is transcation ID?
Yes.
> so, "select * from mydb" is a transcation?
Yes.
> if i executed "select * from mydb" twice, the XID wil be increased by 2
Yep. Whereas if you did
BEGIN;
SELECT 1;
SELECT 1;
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 05:48:14PM -0800, ivan.hou wrote:
>> if i executed "select * from mydb" twice, the XID wil be increased by 2
> Yep. Whereas if you did
> BEGIN;
> SELECT 1;
> SELECT 1;
> COMMIT;
> the xid would
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 05:48:14PM -0800, ivan.hou wrote:
if i executed "select * from mydb" twice, the XID wil be increased by 2
Yep. Whereas if you did
BEGIN;
SELECT 1;
SELECT 1;
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But note that as of 8.3, SELECT-only transactions won't acquire an
>> XID and hence won't advance the counter. So if you're thinking of
>> writing code that depends on that behavior, don't.
> So, the new XID counter
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 07:45:36AM -0800, George, Harry G wrote:
> A user asked for help re high-availability on MS Windows. While I'm
Well, the first thing to do is define what you mean by "high availability".
There's a good discussion of this in the manual. The manual does not,
however, go o
Good points. FYI, I read the 8.2.5 manual, then did some additional
searching, and reviewed Elmasri "Fundamentals of Database Systems, 3rd
ed (text from MS CompSci course on DBMS design). Then emailed an
analysis and the tradeoffs as best I understood them to the user and
requested additional in
You have already posted this various times..
Have you checked with your AV provider that it is not a false positive?
I do not think it is necessary for you to be posting this every day.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al
Notice: This communication may contain sensitive information. If you
[&c.] Just to warn you, there are some people around here who are very
sensitive tot hese sorts of automatic corporate-policy footers. If you can
Yes and those "people", need to get a life. I find it ever interesting
th
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 11:52:28AM -0800, George, Harry G wrote:
> ed (text from MS CompSci course on DBMS design). Then emailed an
> analysis and the tradeoffs as best I understood them to the user and
> requested additional info and requirements (no response so far --
> holidays). AlsoOnl
> From: "Phillip Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Automatically-added disclaimer removed]
I run a mailing list and on the signup page, I have this notice:
NOTE: By posting to the MIMEDefang list, you agree that any
disclaimer, legal boilerplate, or restrictions added to your posting
are null an
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
But note that as of 8.3, SELECT-only transactions won't acquire an
XID and hence won't advance the counter. So if you're thinking of
writing code that depends on that behavior, don
Jeff Frost wrote:
> That's a drag as I have quite a few clients who graph the xacts/sec with
> MRTG. Most of these clients have read heavy workloads and it would be great
> to be able to graph read vs write xacts, but a drag if you have no
> visibility into the read xacts.
You can still get th
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There's no global counter. There's a backend-local "virtual transaction
>> id" counter.
> That's a drag as I have quite a few clients who graph the xacts/sec with
> MRTG.
> Most of these clients have read heavy wor
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jeff Frost wrote:
That's a drag as I have quite a few clients who graph the xacts/sec with
MRTG. Most of these clients have read heavy workloads and it would be great
to be able to graph read vs write xacts, but a drag if you have no
visibility into t
16 matches
Mail list logo
