On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 04:06:38PM -0400, Álvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Jun-24, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > + As a safety device, an aggressive vacuum scan will > > + occur for any table whose multixact-age (see <xref > > + linkend="vacuum-for-multixact-wraparound"/>) is greater than <xref > > + linkend="guc-autovacuum-multixact-freeze-max-age"/>. Also, if the > > + storage occupied by multixacts exceeds 2GB, aggressive vacuum scans > > + will occur more often for all tables, starting with those that have > > + the oldest multixact-age. Both of these kinds of aggressive scans > > + will occur even if autovacuum is nominally disabled. > > This looks good, thanks. > > I think "the space occupied by multixacts" is a bit ambiguous -- it is > talking about pg_multixact/members only, but you could interpret that it > talks about both that and pg_multixact/offsets. I'm not sure we need to > be 100% precise about that, so perhaps what you have is sufficient. But > if we do want to be precise, then maybe " ... if the storage occupied by > multixact members (<literal>pg_multixact/members/</literal>) exceeds ..." > covers it. > > (At least, that's how I remember this. I don't think things have > changed much since 53bb309d2d5a ...)
OK, I got "members" into the doc section and applied it to master and PG 14. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
