Re: Is autovacuum doing a wraparound-avoiding VACUUM?

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 17:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I don't like your wording though; it feels too verbose (and you're
>> losing the ANALYZE in case it's doing both things). How about
>>
>> snprintf(activity, MAX_AUTOVAC_ACTIV_LEN,
>> "autovacuum: VACUUM%s%s", vac
>> tab->at_doanalyze ? " ANALYZE" : "",
>> tab->at_wraparound ? " (wraparound)" : "");

> Yes, looks good.

May I suggest "(to prevent wraparound)" or something like that?
Otherwise, +1.

>> You're not proposing it for 8.3 right?

> I think I am. It's an important diagnostic for your other fix.

I agree, this is important for visibility into what's happening.
The string isn't getting translated so I don't see any big downside
to applying the patch in back branches.

regards, tom lane