"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Yeah, I know, but feel like I'm being a bit naughty in using VACUUM > FREEZE -- the documentation says: > | Selects aggressive "freezing" of tuples. Specifying FREEZE is > | equivalent to performing VACUUM with the vacuum_freeze_min_age > | parameter set to zero. The FREEZE option is deprecated and will be > | removed in a future release; set the parameter instead. > So I figure that since it is deprecated, at some point I'll be setting > the vacuum_freeze_min_age option rather than leaving it at the default > and using VACUUM FREEZE in the nightly maintenance run. I might be mistaken, but I think the reason we're planning to remove the option is mainly so we can get rid of FREEZE as a semi-reserved keyword. The GUC isn't going anywhere. Anyway, the bottom line is what you said: fooling with this setting seems like something that's only needed by advanced users. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
