Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> What do you mean by "not caching unused sequence numbers"? Reducing
> SEQ_LOG_VALS to 1, i.e. WAL-logging every sequence increment?
Right.
> That'd work, but I wonder how significant the impact will be.
As I said, we've accepted worse in order to have stable replication
behavior.
regards, tom lane