On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:32 PM, Jerry Sievers
wrote:
> So I'm (was) puzzled here when a big warehouse system just upgraded to
> 9.6 which I knew does only a few 100k *real* transactions/day was
> wrapping txid_current() so fast, in turn causing some big, nasty tablesl
> to age and then require p
So I'm (was) puzzled here when a big warehouse system just upgraded to
9.6 which I knew does only a few 100k *real* transactions/day was
wrapping txid_current() so fast, in turn causing some big, nasty tablesl
to age and then require painful long-running vacuums...
Got the brilliant idea to full s
