On 09/12/2011 03:44 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
The PostgreSQL team works REALLY hard to prevent any kind of
corruption scenario from rearing its ugly head, so when the word
corruption pops up I start to wonder about the system (hardware
wise) someone is using,
You've apparently never used early versions of EnterpriseDB. ;)
Kidding aside, it's apparently been a while since I read that particular
part of the manual. The error I *was* familiar with was from the 8.0 manual:
"WARNING: some databases have not been vacuumed in 1613770184 transactions
HINT: Better vacuum them within 533713463 transactions, or you may have
a wraparound failure."
Ever since the early days, I've been so paranoid about regular
vacuuming, I'm probably still a little overcautious.
So, my bad. Having a database down for a few hours isn't exactly
desirable, but it's certainly not corruption. :)
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 800 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
stho...@peak6.com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email-disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to
this email
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
