Problem has now been solved. Thanks a lot for all your help.

On 5/12/08, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> "James Farrugia" <james.farrugia@gmail.com> writes:
> > One last thing...can we run into data-loss problems with successfully
> > vacuumed tables even if there is one unvacuumed database object; what
> would
> > have happened if I ignored to vacuum that rogue pg_toast (which was the
> only
> > unvacuumed object within the entire database)?
>
> The database would have shut down when you got to the
> 2-billion-transactions mark. So you'd have had to solve the problem
> sooner or later anyway.
>
> regards, tom lane
>