Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@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
