Re: Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 09:23:32AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 12:13 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>> * PROC_VACUUM_FOR_WRAPAROUND.  Should be innocuous I think, since the
>> "parent" process already has this flag and thus shouldn't be cancelled.
> 
> Currently, we don't support parallel vacuum for autovacuum. So
> parallel workers for vacuum don't have these two flags.

That's something that should IMO be marked in the code as a comment as
something to worry about once/if someone begins playing with parallel
autovacuum.  If the change involving autovacuum is simple, I see no
reason to not add this part now, though.
--
Michael