Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around

Tom Lane wrote:

>pgsql@mohawksoft.com writes:
>  
>
>>In fact, I think it is so bad, that I think we need to back-port a fix to
>>previous versions and issue a notice of some kind.
>>    
>>
>
>They already do issue notices --- see VACUUM.
>
>A real fix (eg the forcible stop we were talking about earlier) will not
>be reasonable to back-port.
>

I hope this question isn't too stupid.... 

Is it be possible to create a "vacuum wraparound" or "vacuum xidreset" 
command which would do the work required to fix the wraparound problem, 
without being as expensive as a normal vacuum of an entire database?