Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> So, will per-table XID tracking allow us to avoid *ever* vacuuming some
> tables?
If your definition of "ever" is less than a billion transactions, sure.
(As Simon points out, with time-partitioned data sets that could often
be arranged, so it's not a completely silly response.)
> If not, what could?
The only possibility for more-than-a-billion is widening XIDs to 64
bits, which would come with its own set of performance penalties.
regards, tom lane