X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD109FB37B for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:33:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23191-02 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:33:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:22:18.440623 by SQLgrey- Received: from svr4.postgresql.org (svr4.postgresql.org [66.98.251.159]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955C59FB392 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:33:13 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.3 Received: from morework.geizhals.at (home.geizhals.at [213.229.14.34]) by svr4.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC1F5AF03C for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:10:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (morework [127.0.0.1]) by morework.geizhals.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57B3DECD2 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:10:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [172.16.42.138] (unknown [172.16.42.138]) by morework.geizhals.at (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:10:47 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <44EB48A9.7030704@geizhals.at> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:10:49 +0200 From: Marinos Yannikos User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: VACUUM FULL needed sometimes to prevent transaction ID wraparound? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 at geizhals.at X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.951 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO, SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL, SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Level: *** X-Archive-Number: 200608/351 X-Sequence-Number: 20536 Hello, we're looking into the reason why we are getting warnings about transaction ID wraparound despite a daily "vaccumdb -qaz". Someone is claiming that VACUUM without FULL cannot reassign XIDs properly when max_fsm_pages was set too low (it says so here too, but this is rather old: http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/Tidbits/perf.html#maxfsmp). Is this true, or do we have a different issue here? We're using 8.1.3 with a database generated on 8.1.3 (i.e. not migrated from 7.x or anything like that). Thanks, Marinos