Maybe a setting similar to max_wal_size could be better for that? +1 Thanks
Peter Eisentraut <pe...@eisentraut.org> 于2024年7月25日周四 21:31写道： > On 25.07.24 13:09, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> However, if there is no more disaster threshold at 2^31, what is the > >> guidance for setting these? Or more radically, why even run > >> transaction-count-based vacuum at all? > > > > To allow the CLOG to be truncated. There's no disaster anymore, but > > without freezing, the clog will grow indefinitely. > > Maybe a setting similar to max_wal_size could be better for that? > > > >
