Re: What is "wraparound failure", really? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: What is "wraparound failure", really?
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKGK48vNvdM+y+oQy+u0jsKLJFV1=3b_U1MON3f3akoxyJQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to What is "wraparound failure", really?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:36 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> "The sole disadvantage of increasing autovacuum_freeze_max_age (and
> vacuum_freeze_table_age along with it) is that the pg_xact and
> pg_commit_ts subdirectories of the database cluster will take more
> space..."

Just by the way, if we're updating this sentence, it continues
"because it must store..." but it should surely be "because they must
store...".



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix uninitialized copy_data var (src/backend/commands/subscriptioncmds.c)
Next
From: "kato-sho@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Farewell greeting