On 2/25/06, Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - This case points to my paranoia about TRUNCATE (expressed this > afternoon on IRC) having some merit... > > Jan, I think the case Rod describes is a case that makes it mandatory > for logswitch_finish() to exit without truncating if it sees any locks > outstanding on the sl_log_n table in question; you could have the > situation where a long running transaction has 1M tuples, not yet > committed, sitting in sl_log_1. They aren't visible as being live > tuples, but they are NOT dead...
You can see if there are long-running queries from snapshot. You can even tell in which sl_log table they can be with a bit of accounting. -- marko _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
