From dd1569da67937b819d1589a9f664af9aa9657945 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alvaro Herrera Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 12:00:40 -0300 Subject: [PATCH] Fix typo in freeze_table_age implementation The original code used freeze_min_age instead of freeze_table_age. The main consequence of this mistake is that lowering freeze_min_age would cause full-table scans to occur much more frequently, which causes serious issues because the number of writes required is much larger. That feature (freeze_min_age) is supposed to affect only how soon tuples are frozen; some pages should still be skipped due to the visibility map. Backpatch to 8.4, where the freeze_table_age feature was introduced. Report and patch from Andres Freund --- src/backend/commands/vacuum.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c b/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c index a37a54e5b4..4800b43764 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c @@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ vacuum_set_xid_limits(int freeze_min_age, * VACUUM schedule, the nightly VACUUM gets a chance to freeze tuples * before anti-wraparound autovacuum is launched. */ - freezetable = freeze_min_age; + freezetable = freeze_table_age; if (freezetable < 0) freezetable = vacuum_freeze_table_age; freezetable = Min(freezetable, autovacuum_freeze_max_age * 0.95);