Andrey Borodin <amborodin86@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 3:04 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Indeed, it seems like this behavior makes pg_xact_status() basically
>> useless as things stand.
> If we agree that xid allocation is not something persistent, let's fix
> the test?
If we're not going to fix this behavior, we need to fix the docs
to disclaim that pg_xact_status() is of use for what it's said
to be good for.
regards, tom lane
