Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread John Lister
On 21/01/2011 23:40, Tom Lane wrote: "John Lister" writes: On another bizarre note, A database wide vacuum has just finished, but I'm still getting the warnings: GMT WARNING: database "backend" must be vacuumed within 10205310 transactions Did you do that vacuum as a superuser? Thanks for yo

Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread John Lister
"John Lister" writes: On another bizarre note, A database wide vacuum has just finished, but I'm still getting the warnings: GMT WARNING: database "backend" must be vacuumed within 10205310 transactions Did you do that vacuum as a superuser? Thanks for your help, but I managed to work it out

Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:27 AM, John Lister wrote: > Instead I tried to vacuum them, but this didn't make any difference (or > indeed do anything), so in the end I deleted the tables manually instead, > which instantly reset the transaction count back to the 1billion mark.  I > now need to find o

Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread John Lister
Apologies resending to the list as used wrong account... Was this expected behaviour with temporary tables? It's more expected behavior when you have long running transactions. I haven't seen it caused by temp tables. Was the parent process in a really long transaction or just open a long ti

Re: [ADMIN] Postgres Backup Utility

2011-01-22 Thread Scott Ribe
On Jan 20, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Bradley Holbrook wrote: > Martin French is right though, ask your developers to write down all their > SQL struct changes and they look at you funny... and being a developer > myself I'd look at me funny. Well, it's what I do and it's trivial. Just don't type DDL dir

Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread Tom Lane
"John Lister" writes: >>> Was this expected behaviour with temporary tables? >> It's more expected behavior when you have long running transactions. >> I haven't seen it caused by temp tables. Was the parent process in a >> really long transaction or just open a long time without one? > The fi

Re: [ADMIN] Should autovacuum do a database wide vacuum near transaction limit?

2011-01-22 Thread PriceGoblin Accounts
Was this expected behaviour with temporary tables? It's more expected behavior when you have long running transactions. I haven't seen it caused by temp tables. Was the parent process in a really long transaction or just open a long time without one? The first thing I checked was for open tr