On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > OK, just keep going below 100: > > 105 -> 5 > 104 -> 4 > 103 -> 3 > 102 -> max_xid > 101 -> max_xid - 1 > 100 -> max_xid - 2 > 99 -> max_id > 98 -> max_id -1
Yeah, I think this is what the code is doing. > > Wouldn't you rather: > > 105 -> 5 > 104 -> 4 > 103 -> 3 > 102 -> 3 > 101 -> 3 > 100 -> 3 > 99 -> max_id > 98 -> max_id -1 > I think I would expect > 105 -> 5 > 104 -> 4 > 103 -> 3 > 102 -> max_id > 101 -> max_id-1 > 100 -> max_id-2 > 99 -> max_id-3 But it doesn't really matter either way, does it? We don't even allow setting vacuum_max_freeze_age to 2^31-1 or any value that would be close to triggering a problem here. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
