On May 2, 2006, at 2:26 PM, Tony Wasson wrote:
The script detects a wrap at 2 billion. It starts warning once one or
more databases show an age over 1 billion transactions. It reports
critical at 1.5B transactions. I hope everyone out there is vacuuming
*all* databases often.
Something seems
Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 2:26 PM, Tony Wasson wrote:
The script detects a wrap at 2 billion. It starts warning once one or
more databases show an age over 1 billion transactions. It reports
critical at 1.5B transactions. I hope everyone out there is vacuuming
*all* databases
On 5/2/06, Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 2:26 PM, Tony Wasson wrote:
The script detects a wrap at 2 billion. It starts warning once one or
more databases show an age over 1 billion transactions. It reports
critical at 1.5B transactions. I hope everyone out there is
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:06:30 -0700,
Tony Wasson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah thanks, it's a bug in my understanding of the thresholds.
With the standard freezing policy, the age column will start at one
billion for a freshly-vacuumed database.
So essentially, 1B is normal, 2B is the
On 5/2/06, Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:06:30 -0700,
Tony Wasson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah thanks, it's a bug in my understanding of the thresholds.
With the standard freezing policy, the age column will start at one
billion for a freshly-vacuumed
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:03:40PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
That's right, because a database's age is only decremented in
database-wide vacuums. (Wow, who wouldn't want a person-wide vacuum if
it did the same thing ...)
The heck with age, I'd take a person-wide vacuum if it just got rid
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:06:30PM -0700, Tony Wasson wrote:
Ah thanks, it's a bug in my understanding of the thresholds.
With the standard freezing policy, the age column will start at one
billion for a freshly-vacuumed database.
So essentially, 1B is normal, 2B is the max. The logic is
