Horton

Re: Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing

Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-11-10T12:11:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 11:51, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 8:16 PM Matthias van de Meent
> <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> AFAICU, in the thread referred by you, it seems that the main reported
> issue will be resolved by this patch but there is a discussion about
> xmin moving backward which seems to be the case with the current code
> as per code comments mentioned by Andres. Is my understanding correct?

That is correct.

Commits

  1. Fix parallel operations that prevent oldest xmin from advancing.