Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> vacuum analyze doesn't unfreeze pg_class. It could create unfrozen
> > >> tuples in pg_statistic, perhaps, but we could easily fix that by
> > >> truncating pg_statistic afterwards (its not like there wi
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> vacuum analyze doesn't unfreeze pg_class. It could create unfrozen
> >> tuples in pg_statistic, perhaps, but we could easily fix that by
> >> truncating pg_statistic afterwards (its not like there will be useful
> >> data there...)
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> vacuum analyze doesn't unfreeze pg_class. It could create unfrozen
>> tuples in pg_statistic, perhaps, but we could easily fix that by
>> truncating pg_statistic afterwards (its not like there will be useful
>> data there...)
> I have added --analyze to
Tom Lane wrote:
> Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT writes:
> > I am still answering here because my question was related to upgrade.
> > I think you need to turn off autovacuum before freezing to avoid a later
> > analyze
> > that unfreezes pg_class (or the stats table).
>
> vacuum analyze doesn't un
Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT writes:
> I am still answering here because my question was related to upgrade.
> I think you need to turn off autovacuum before freezing to avoid a later
> analyze
> that unfreezes pg_class (or the stats table).
vacuum analyze doesn't unfreeze pg_class. It could cre
> > One more question I have though is:
> > How do you make sure noone (e.g. autovacuum analyze)
> > unfreezes tuples after the vacuum freeze ?
>
> I will start a new thread to answer this question, but the short answer
> is that the freeze only needs to happen in a fresh initdb database, and
>
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian p??e v ?t 19. 02. 2009 v 08:08 -0500:
> > > you should use vacuum_freeze_min_age instead. On other side it
> > breaks
> > > vacuumdb backward compatibility which we did not declare, but it
> > could
> > > be fine.
> >
> > How does adding a flag break backwar
Bruce Momjian píše v čt 19. 02. 2009 v 08:08 -0500:
> > you should use vacuum_freeze_min_age instead. On other side it
> breaks
> > vacuumdb backward compatibility which we did not declare, but it
> could
> > be fine.
>
> How does adding a flag break backward compatibiity?
>
I meant that vacuum
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> The FREEZ option is deprecated. See
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-vacuum.html
I mentioned PGOPTIONS as a suggestion when I posted but on one said that
was a good idea; they just wanted to know why I needed this
functionality.
> you should use vacu
The FREEZ option is deprecated. See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-vacuum.html
you should use vacuum_freeze_min_age instead. On other side it breaks
vacuumdb backward compatibility which we did not declare, but it could
be fine.
Zdenek
Bruce Momjian píše v út 17. 0
Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT wrote:
>
> > > > I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> > > > binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> > > > options; patch attached.
> > >
> > > Exactly what do you think the upgrade utility is going to do wit
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> options; patch attached.
>
> I could also accomplish with with PGOPTIONs but this seem like a cleaner
> solution.
Applied.
--
Bruce
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 18:52 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> > > binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> > > options; patch attached.
> >
> > Exactly wh
> > > I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> > > binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> > > options; patch attached.
> >
> > Exactly what do you think the upgrade utility is going to do with it?
> > Surely not a database-wide VACUUM FRE
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> > binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> > options; patch attached.
>
> Exactly what do you think the upgrade utility is going to do with it?
> Surely no
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
> binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
> options; patch attached.
Exactly what do you think the upgrade utility is going to do with it?
Surely not a database-wide VACUUM FREEZ
I would like to add a --freeze parameter to vacuumdb for use by the
binary upgrade utility, and for symmetry with the existing VACUUM
options; patch attached.
I could also accomplish with with PGOPTIONs but this seem like a cleaner
solution.
--
Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us
Enter
17 matches
Mail list logo
