On Wed, Apr 9, 2025, 11:57 Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Forget original purpose, is there presently a bug or not?
>
> Yes, there is a bug. Accounting rows inserted as part of an aborted
> transaction in
> n_ins_since_vacuum is not correct, since the same rows are being
> accounted for with n_dead_tup.
>
So why is it important we not account for the aborted insert in both
n_ins_since_vacuum and n_dead_tup?
When would you ever add them together so that an actual double-counting
would reflect in some total.
You aren't upset that n_live_tup and this both include the non-aborted
inserts.
David J.