Re: [HACKERS] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2

On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 09:39:27AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 20:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > In fact, maybe we should just force an autovac cycle for any DB that
> > appears to be approaching wraparound, rather than waiting for the
> > shutdown-before-wraparound code to kick in.  Getting into that state
> > amounts to whacking DBAs upside the head for being stupid, which
> > doesn't really win us any friends ...
>
> Yes, please can we have the auto autovacuum cut in rather than the
> wraparound message? I'd rather have them complain that we did this, than
> complain that we didn't.
>
> Normally, I wouldn't support automatically starting admin tasks without
> thr sysadmins knowledge.

I think it'd be good to put a big, fat WARNING in the log if we fire up
an autovac to avoid an XID wrap, since it's an indication that the
vacuuming scheme that's in place probably isn't good enough.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461