Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations
Date: 2022-03-31 04:11:48
Message-ID: CAH2-Wzkxx=Jnn9rCWYOh-Wjh_S+5OcsNVxSgqmcU91P2QnQa4Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 9:04 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> (gdb) p vacrel->NewRelfrozenXid
> $3 = 717
> (gdb) p vacrel->relfrozenxid
> $4 = 717
> (gdb) p OldestXmin
> $5 = 5112
> (gdb) p aggressive
> $6 = false

Does this OldestXmin seem reasonable at this point in execution, based
on context? Does it look too high? Something else?

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dilip Kumar 2022-03-31 04:16:16 Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2022-03-31 04:10:43 Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set