Josh Berkus wrote: > On 11/12/2014 06:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> How did template0 even get a MultiXact? That sounds like they're really > >> abusing the template databases. :( (Do keep in mind that MXID 1 is a > >> special value.) > > No, it's normal -- template0 does not have a multixact in any tuple's > > xmax, but datminxid is set to the value that is current when it is > > frozen. > > So, to follow up on this: it seems to me that we shouldn't be requiring > freezing for databases where allowconn=false. This seems like a TODO to > me, even possibly a backpatchable bug fix.
Why do we need this for pg_multixact but not for pg_clog? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
