On Wed, Apr 9, 2025, 11:57 Sami Imseih <samims...@gmail.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.
