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