On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 02:52:16PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 12:10:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> It suddenly strikes me to worry that we have an XID wraparound hazard
> >>> for entries in the notify queue.
>
> > Is this still an open issue?
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 12:10:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It suddenly strikes me to worry that we have an XID wraparound hazard
>>> for entries in the notify queue.
> Is this still an open issue? Should it be a TODO item?
I don't think anyone's done anything about
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 12:10:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Dilger writes:
> > On 11/23/19 8:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> It suddenly strikes me to worry that we have an XID wraparound hazard
> >> for entries in the notify queue.
>
> > Is it worth checking for this condition in autovacuum?
>
Mark Dilger writes:
> On 11/23/19 8:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It suddenly strikes me to worry that we have an XID wraparound hazard
>> for entries in the notify queue.
> Is it worth checking for this condition in autovacuum?
Dunno, maybe. It's a different avenue to consider, at least.
> There
On 11/23/19 8:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
In connection with a different issue, I wrote:
* The point of calling asyncQueueReadAllNotifications in
Exec_ListenPreCommit is to advance over already-committed queue entries
before we start sending any events to the client. Without this, a
In connection with a different issue, I wrote:
> * The point of calling asyncQueueReadAllNotifications in
> Exec_ListenPreCommit is to advance over already-committed queue entries
> before we start sending any events to the client. Without this, a
> newly-listening client could be sent some very
