Hi,
On 2023-01-11 15:23:18 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah, I meant if #1 had committed and then #2 started to do its thing.
> I was worried that decoding might reach the nextval operations in
> transaction #2 before it replayed #1.
>
> This worry may be entirely based on me not understanding how this
> actually works. Do we always apply a transaction as soon as we see the
> commit record for it, before decoding any further?
Yes.
Otherwise we'd have a really hard time figuring out the correct historical
snapshot to use for subsequent transactions - they'd have been able to see the
catalog modifications made by the committing transaction.
Greetings,
Andres Freund