On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 8:35 AM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, that is correct. How about a comment as follows: > > /* > > * Lock the sequence so its identity (namespace and name) cannot change > > * under us via a concurrent DROP, RENAME or SET SCHEMA while we read it. > > * The lock is released immediately rather than at transaction end. The > > * later synchronization does not depend on this captured identity > > * remaining valid, as it re-opens the sequence and tolerates concurrent > > * changes. Releasing early also avoids holding one lock per sequence, > > * which could exhaust the lock table. > > */ > > LGTM. >
Thanks, pushed now. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
