I wonder if this is a bug: -- If no locks are found, return the maximum possible bigint value if max_seq is null then return 9223372036854775807

I wonder if this is a bug: -- If no locks are found, return the maximum possible bigint value if max_seq is null then return 9223372036854775807; end if; Would be a race here by returning a big number to the caller, then more data is written in between? Should instead check the current max sequence number before checking the locks?