>From ceb5683e62bcae51689dc27e0764f822e26595f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andres Freund Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:12:52 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values. The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 10000000 multixacts can contain a lot of members. Since there's no good reason for the current limits, lower them a good bit. Setting them to 0 would be a bad idea, triggering endless vacuums, so still retain a limit. --- src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c index 230c5cc..aec4adc 100644 --- a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c +++ b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c @@ -2516,17 +2516,17 @@ static struct config_int ConfigureNamesInt[] = }, &autovacuum_freeze_max_age, /* see pg_resetxlog if you change the upper-limit value */ - 200000000, 100000000, 2000000000, + 200000000, 100000, 2000000000, NULL, NULL, NULL }, { - /* see varsup.c for why this is PGC_POSTMASTER not PGC_SIGHUP */ + /* see multixact.c for why this is PGC_POSTMASTER not PGC_SIGHUP */ {"autovacuum_multixact_freeze_max_age", PGC_POSTMASTER, AUTOVACUUM, gettext_noop("Multixact age at which to autovacuum a table to prevent multixact wraparound."), NULL }, &autovacuum_multixact_freeze_max_age, - 400000000, 10000000, 2000000000, + 400000000, 10000, 2000000000, NULL, NULL, NULL }, { -- 2.4.0.rc2.1.g3d6bc9a