Thanks a lot! So, the correct calculation is like this:
select application_name,
txid_snapshot_xmin(txid_current_snapshot()),
backend_xmin::TEXT::BIGINT,
(txid_snapshot_xmin(txid_current_snapshot())-backend_xmin::TEXT::BIGINT)%(2^32)::BIGINT
from pg_stat_replication;
application_name | txid_snapshot_xmin | backend_xmin | ?column?
------------------+--------------------+--------------+----------
xxxxxxxxxx | 6960964080 | 2665996642 | 142
That makes more sense.
Hi,
On 2018-10-01 12:20:26 +0200, Torsten Förtsch wrote:
> if I understand it correctly, backend_xmin in pg_stat_replication is the
> xmin that's reported back by hot_standby_feedback. Given there are no
> long-running transactions on the replica, I presume that value should be
> pretty close to the xmin field of any recent snapshots on the master. This
> is true for all my databases but one:
>
> select application_name,
> txid_snapshot_xmin(txid_current_snapshot()),
> backend_xmin::TEXT::BIGINT,
>
> txid_snapshot_xmin(txid_current_snapshot())-backend_xmin::TEXT::BIGINT
> from pg_stat_replication;
>
> application_name | txid_snapshot_xmin | backend_xmin | ?column?
> ------------------+--------------------+--------------+------------
> xxxxxxxxxx | 6 957 042 833 | 2 662 075 435 | 4 294 967 398
I don't think the calculation you're doing here is correct.
backend_xmin is an xid (max 2^32-1), whereas txid_snapshot_xmin returns
an xid *with* epoch (max 2^64-1). What you're measuring here is simply
the fact that the xid counter has wrapped around.
Greetings,
Andres Freund