Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Please note that 9.4 and earlier do not have ExecVacuum; the
> > determination of freeze ages is done partly in gram.y (yuck). Not sure
> > what will the patch look like in those branches.
>
> One way to make fix back-patchable is to consider doing the changes
> for Vacuum and AutoVacuum in one common path (vacuum_set_xid_limits())?
> However, I think we might need to distinguish whether the call is from
> Vacuum or AutoVacuum path.
I think it's easier if we just adjust the patch in older branches to
affect the code that now lives in ExecVacuum. Trying to make all
branches the same will probably make the whole thing more complicated,
for no real purpose.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services