If recovery_target_inclusive were able to take the third value "xact", is it exactly what you want?
And is it acceptable?
Yes, that would be exactly what I would want. It would work to have a 3rd value for recovery_target_inclusive, although perhaps it's debatable that instead, it should actually be the default behavior to roll any LSN with recovery_target_inclusive = true until it is actually visible? If I say I want to "include" an LSN in my recovery target, it doesn't make much sense if that just won't be visible unless it's an actual commit LSN, so in fact the recovery point does not include the LSN.
A related problem kind of demonstrates the same odd behavior. If you put in recovery_target_xid to a subtransaction_id, it just skips it and continues recovering, which really seems to be undesirable behavior. It would be nice if that also could roll up to the next valid actual commit transaction.
