From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Craig A. James <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>
Subject: Re: No vacuum for insert-only database?
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:16:53 -0800
Message-ID: <200603131116.53998.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060313174135.GA16213@surnet.cl>
References: <44158989.6020103@modgraph-usa.com>
<4415A9A4.5020903@modgraph-usa.com>
<20060313174135.GA16213@surnet.cl>
Craig,
> Transaction ID wraparound will be a problem at a bit less than 2 billion
> transactions. So if you vacuum the table every 1 billion transactions
> you are safe. I suggest you read the "routine maintenance" section in
> the docs; the wraparound issue is explained there.
For reference, we calculated on a data warehouse with about 700 million
rows in the main fact table that we had 6 years until XID wraparound.
Mind you, that's partly because all of our rows were inserted in large
batches of 100,000 rows each.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, alvherre@commandprompt.com, cjames@modgraph-usa.com
Subject: Re: No vacuum for insert-only database?
In-Reply-To: <200603131116.53998.josh@agliodbs.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox