From: PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
To: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Cc: sanjaya.waruna@gmail.com
Subject: vacuum_freeze_min_age description validity
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:54:29 +0000
Message-ID: <163186886974.4680.11795770889268302099@wrigleys.postgresql.org> (raw)
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/routine-vacuuming.html
Description:
Hi All,
I have a doubt about the vacuum_freeze_min_age explanation here;
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/routine-vacuuming.html
"vacuum_freeze_min_age controls how old an XID value has to be before rows
bearing that XID will be frozen. Increasing this setting may avoid
unnecessary work if the rows that would otherwise be frozen will soon be
modified again, but decreasing this setting increases the number of
transactions that can elapse before the table must be vacuumed again."
Shouldn't the "Increasing" and "decreasing" words there interchange the
places?
Isn't decreasing value for vacuum_freeze_min_age causes vacuum to freeze
tuples soon due to reduced age? So it reduces number of transactions that
can elapse before the table must be vacuumed.
Please let me know if my understanding is incorrect.
Cheers,
Sanjaya.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: noreply@postgresql.org, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org, sanjaya.waruna@gmail.com
Subject: Re: vacuum_freeze_min_age description validity
In-Reply-To: <163186886974.4680.11795770889268302099@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox