On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 02:31:38PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > So I think we need to fix it to capture the target WAL position > at the start, as I've done in the attached patch.
+1, it looks sensible to me. > In principle > this might make things a bit slower because of the extra > transaction required, but I don't notice any above-the-noise > difference on my own workstation. I'm wondering if the environments where this extra transaction could make a noticeable difference are also environments where doing that extra transaction can save some iteration(s), which would be at least as costly.
