From: Craig A. James <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: No vacuum for insert-only database?
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 09:19:32 -0800
Message-ID: <4415A9A4.5020903@modgraph-usa.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060313150949.GK8274@surnet.cl>
References: <44158989.6020103@modgraph-usa.com>
<20060313150949.GK8274@surnet.cl>
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>If I only insert data into a table, never update or delete, then I should
>>never have to vacuum it. Is that correct?
>
> You still need to vacuum eventually, to avoid transaction Id wraparound
> issues. But not as often.
Thanks. Any suggestions for what "not as often" means? For example, if my database will never contain more than 10 million rows, is that a problem? 100 million rows? When does transaction ID wraparound become a problem?
Craig
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: cjames@modgraph-usa.com, alvherre@commandprompt.com
Subject: Re: No vacuum for insert-only database?
In-Reply-To: <4415A9A4.5020903@modgraph-usa.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