Re: autovacuum worker started without a worker entry - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Luca Ferrari
Subject Re: autovacuum worker started without a worker entry
Date
Msg-id CAKoxK+4mtH9PC36oHnkVJzyi8CdKAyD6Fqvt4H3Q4o13yxDQKw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: autovacuum worker started without a worker entry  (Vijaykumar Jain <vijaykumarjain.github@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: autovacuum worker started without a worker entry  (Ninad Shah <nshah.postgres@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 6:27 PM Vijaykumar Jain
<vijaykumarjain.github@gmail.com> wrote:
> postgres/varsup.c at master · postgres/postgres (github.com)
> I think, this block when it is about to assign the next xid, it does the math, and triggers an autolauncher start.
> I might be wrong, I did not run a backtrace though :)
>
>  * Check to see if it's safe to assign another XID. This protects against
>  * catastrophic data loss due to XID wraparound. The basic rules are:
>  * If we're past xidVacLimit, start trying to force autovacuum cycles.
>  * If we're past xidWarnLimit, start issuing warnings.
>  * If we're past xidStopLimit, refuse to execute transactions, unless
>  * we are running in single-user mode (which gives an escape hatch
>  * to the DBA who somehow got past the earlier defenses).

Seem reasonable as explaination, even if sounds to me xidVacLimit is 65536.

Thanks,
Luca



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Luca Ferrari
Date:
Subject: Re: pgcrypto - real life examples to encrypt / decrypt
Next
From: Masih Tavassoli
Date:
Subject: JWT decoder