On 23/02/11 00:26, Greg Stark wrote:
It's also possible there's a bug of course. If someone was using that
buffer and somehow failed to notify the vacuum that they were done it
would wait for a very long time (forever?). However if vacuum
eventually continued when the query was canceled then it seems likely
it was working as intended.
Greg, thanks for clarifying this.
Unfortunately this time around I canceled the vacuum and then the query.
However *next* time I'll get rid of the query 1st and see what happens.
Cheers
Mark
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
