MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <176767268098.1084085.10345048667224193115@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <194d68d70a31bd8523dd6dd578ef91dea6a6dfef.camel@cybertec.at>
In-Reply-To: <194d68d70a31bd8523dd6dd578ef91dea6a6dfef.camel@cybertec.at>
From: Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 23:36:07 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CABV9wwMz7pi0xFc+CdMijWVqQGMQAL+2a0h9s9_QBuG2uC0KPg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Doubt on content under Routine Vacuuming section
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: sanjaya.waruna@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABV9wwMz7pi0xFc%2BCdMijWVqQGMQAL%2B2a0h9s9_QBuG2uC0KPg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 4:53=E2=80=AFAM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.=
at> wrote:
> On Tue, 2026-01-06 at 04:11 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/routine-vacuuming.html#ROUTINE-=
VACUUMING
> > There are five points under this section;
> >  "In this condition any transactions already in progress can continue, =
but
> > only read-only transactions can be started. Operations that modify data=
base
> > records or truncate relations will fail. The VACUUM command can still b=
e run
> > normally. Note that, contrary to what was sometimes recommended in earl=
ier
> > releases, it is not necessary or desirable to stop the postmaster or en=
ter
> > single user-mode in order to restore normal operation. Instead, follow =
these
> > steps:..."
> >
> > In the third point it says "Use pg_stat_replication to find slots where
> > age(xmin) or age(catalog_xmin) is large. In many cases, such slots were
> > created for replication to servers that no longer exist, or that have b=
een
> > down for a long time."
> > However, those columns, ie: xmin and catalog_xmin exists in
> > pg_replication_slots metadata view. :
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/view-pg-replication-slots.html
> > Not in the pg_stat_replication.
> >
> > Please check if my observation is correct or not.
>
> You are correct.  Attached is a patch that fixes the documentation.
>

+1 on the fix, and the adding of the structname's.

Given the commit that introduced this was backpatched to v14, ISTM
this should probably be backpatched as well.


Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net