Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> But it seems that we need a band-aid for 8.1 and earlier. The simplest >> fix I can think of is for vacuum not to attempt to advance the >> datvacuumxid/datfrozenxid fields if it skipped over any temp tables of >> other backends. That's a bit nasty, since in a database making heavy >> use of temp tables, you might do a whole lot of vacuums without ever >> meeting that condition. Anyone have a better idea? > That seems nasty. Can we examine the xmin of the pg_class entry for > temp tables instead? No, because any sort of schema update on the temp table would rewrite its pg_class row with a newer version. You couldn't assume that the pg_class row is older than what's in the table. Consider this perfectly reasonable scenario: CREATE TEMP TABLE foo ... COPY foo FROM ... CREATE INDEX ... <- must set relhasindex regards, tom lane
