Re: Vacuum Vs Vacuum Full

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes:
>> BTW, what version of PostgreSQL is this?  Database-wide vacuum is no
>> longer required for XID wraparound issues.  I think this was an 8.3
>> change but might have happened in 8.2, I don't remember.
>
> 8.2.  But you could still get that message, even in CVS HEAD, if
> autovacuum was failing to complete for some reason (and had been
> failing for quite a long time).

Should that message to updated since a database-wide vacuum is no longer
required, or are you saying that the message is still relevant is some
corner cases?