On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 15:22:44 -0500 (CDT) Scott Whitney <[email protected]> wrote:
> It does say a FULL vacuum, and that you are not doing. You're confusing terminology. VACUUM FULL is not the same as a "full database vacuum". The latter is simply expressing that vacuuming individual tables won't fix the problem. A VACUUM FULL is not required. You really just need to wait it out. Although at the rate the number seems to be dropping, you may be in for trouble. > > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Mike Christensen > <[email protected]> </div><div>Date:07/07/2014 3:17 PM (GMT-06:00) > </div><div>To: Prabhjot Sheena <[email protected]> > </div><div>Cc: [email protected],Forums postgresql > <[email protected]> </div><div>Subject: Re: [ADMIN] [GENERAL] > WARNING: database must be vacuumed within 8439472 transactions </div><div> > </div>Sounds like you just have to wait until it finishes.. > > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Prabhjot Sheena > <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello > We are using postgresql 8.3 database for last 5 yrs for this > production database and its running fine. This is our critical database which > runs 24*7. This weekend we started getting these messages > > HINT: To avoid a database shutdown, execute a full-database VACUUM. > WARNING: database must be vacuumed within 8439472 transactions > > i am currently running this command > > vacuumdb --analyze db > > while this command is running i m still getting these messages > > WARNING: database must be vacuumed within 2645303 transactions. > > The value of number of transactions is going down every minute > > Can anyone tell me what is the best way to sort up this issue. > > Thanks > Avi > > > > -- Bill Moran <[email protected]> -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
