> Forget original purpose, is there presently a bug or not? Yes, there is a bug. Accounting rows inserted as part of an aborted transaction in n_ins_since_vacuum is not correct, since the same rows are being accounted for with n_dead_tup.
> Between the two options the one where we count dead tuples makes more sense > on its face. IIUC, I am saying the same thing, if an inserted row is rolled back, it should only count as a dead tuple (n_dead_tup) only, and not in n_ins_since_vacuum. -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
