Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 10:18:46 -0800
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
	John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum?
Message-ID: <20220216181846.4syh3mnq5qzjrdiz@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <CA+TgmoY3m3RimCHifQnxU3YDVV7oYRbRUX4GZ4FuYkhnhe0giA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220203215048.rmwjzixdzaetedxq@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <CAFBsxsHp3brGqWu5vU_6d5wfOU5i40c8u3Hg=3TtN4qZwmAecw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-WzkEStBgnk0buJYAKw5jpRYUE+-tuLYn5U+vDyhXNfu+DQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFBsxsFiMPxQ-dHZ8tOgktn=+ffeJT3+GinZ4zdOGbmAnCYadA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-WzkpZcat1YmEVAKpcMBaWRXUd2vGVKHtrBjzBGDL=j6mbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD21AoCAKf+yq8pHLpmyxxS=A5zNFUvxTeergLOhobjYaJbF+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-Wznb+W7HdrcT7vLe5hvxA131ay2EwdY+r3z8Uehd_Jr5uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoadjx+r8_gGbbnNifL6vEyjZntiQRPzyixrUihvtZ5jdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-Wz=5RuakSPA9euKmUCa3WX5HB2GFeLd7xKXyH5AwbpCGtg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAH2-Wz=5RuakSPA9euKmUCa3WX5HB2GFeLd7xKXyH5AwbpCGtg@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220216181846.4syh3mnq5qzjrdiz%40alap3.anarazel.de>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 2022-02-16 10:14:19 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Absolutely -- couldn't agree more. Do you think it's worth targeting
> 14 here, or just HEAD?

I'd go for HEAD first, but wouldn't protest against 14.


> I'm pretty sure that some people believe that wraparound can cause
> actual data corruption

Well, historically they're not wrong. And we've enough things stored in 32bit
counters that I'd be surprised if we didn't have more wraparound issues. Of
course that's not related to anti-wrap vacuums...

Greetings,

Andres Freund