Re: [PATCH] Support Int64 GUCs

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:30 PM wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx@gmail.com> wrote:
>       I think we need int64 GUCs, due to these  parameters（ autovacuum_freeze_table_age,
autovacuum_freeze_max_age,Whena table age is greater than any of these parameters an aggressive vacuum will be
performed,When we implementing xid64, is it still necessary to be in the int range? btw, I have a suggestion to record
awarning in the log when the table age exceeds the int maximum. These default values we can set a reasonable values
,forexample autovacuum_freeze_max_age=4294967295 or 8589934592. 

In principle, even with 64-bit transaction ids we could specify *_age
GUCs as int32 with bigger units or as float8.  That feels a bit
awkward for me.  This is why I queried more about Tom's opinion in
more details: did he propose to wait with int64 GUCs before we have
64-bit transaction ids, or give up about them completely?

Links.
1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3649727.1727276882%40sss.pgh.pa.us

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase