Re: [GENERAL] Wal logs continued...

2001-05-14 Thread Tom Lane
Barry Lind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Given what you say below, I think there is a documentation bug then. In > Section 9.3 of the Administrators Guide it says: > "After a checkpoint has been made, any log segments written before the > redo record are removed, so checkpoints are used to fre

[GENERAL] Wal logs continued...

2001-05-14 Thread webb sprague
Earlier I posted with my problems about the WAL logs eating up all my diskspace. I tried the solutions offered--checkpoint after a big copy and shortening the time between flushes. They helped somewhat. Unfortunately, the problem snow seems to happen when I vacuum-analyze after a big delete.