On 2018-06-07 16:24:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > Exclude VACUUMs from RunningXactData
> > GetRunningTransactionData() should ignore VACUUM procs because in some
> > cases they are assigned xids.
>
> Uh, what? Lazy vacuum shouldn't acquire an xid. If it does, that
> would suggest it's running code that it's unsafe for
> GetRunningTransactionData to ignore.
Well, we currently do acquire an xid at the end when truncating (see
[1]). But that still doesn't seem to make it the right thing to ignore
these xids. Let's continue the discussion over there?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
[1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20180607211918.h2cdja26ypriw2sm%40alap3.anarazel.de