On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 2:02 AM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> Attach a patch which fixed them.
Pushed something close to that just now. I decided that it was better
to not specify when truncation happened in these two places at all,
though. The important detail is that
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 6:04 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:33 AM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> > I noticed that commit 5212d447fa updated some comments in multixact.c
> because
> > SLRU truncation for multixacts is performed during VACUUM, instead of
> > checkpoint. Sho
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:33 AM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> I noticed that commit 5212d447fa updated some comments in multixact.c because
> SLRU truncation for multixacts is performed during VACUUM, instead of
> checkpoint. Should the following comments which mentioned checkpointer be
> changed
Hi,
I noticed that commit 5212d447fa updated some comments in multixact.c because
SLRU truncation for multixacts is performed during VACUUM, instead of
checkpoint. Should the following comments which mentioned checkpointer be
changed, too?
1.
* we compute it (using nextMXact if none are valid).
