On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 04:37:50PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> My guess would be that the vacuum was triggered by updates, but there were
> active transactions that prevented vacuum from cleaning up the dead tuples,
> so it came back later and was able to clean them up at that time.
>
> Would need to do a little more in-depth research/monitoring to determine
> if that guess is correct or not.
makes perfect sense, thanks.
Best regards,
depesz
--
The best thing about modern society is how easy it is to avoid contact with it.
http://depesz.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
