Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends

"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> writes:
> I don't know either, but this brings up another question. Stats
> wraparound. The n_tup_ins/upd/del columns in the stats system are
> defined as bigint, what happens when the total number of upd for example
> exceeds the capacity for bigint, or overflows to negative, anyone have
> any idea?

We'll all be safely dead, for one thing ;-)

At one update per nanosecond, it'd take approximately 300 years to wrap
a 64-bit counter. Somehow I don't have a problem with the idea that
Postgres would need to be rebooted that often. We'd want to fix the
32-bit nature of XIDs long before 64-bit stats counters get to be a
real-world issue ...

regards, tom lane