Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: shared_preload_libraries support on Win32?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: shared_preload_libraries support on Win32?
Date: 2007-01-29 20:56:51
Message-ID: 19659.1170104211@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com wrote:
>> You're right - we need the copy in the postmaster (to setup shared
>> memory and LW locks), and we need them in the backends too.

> Just make sure you don't load the libraries in bgwriter et al ...

I see that Korry's patch doesn't do that, but I'm wondering why exactly.
In a Unix environment such libraries *would* be propagated into bgwriter
and every other postmaster child; is there a reason for the setup on
Windows to be different?  In particular, what about autovacuum, which
ISTM should be as close to a standard backend as possible?

Either way we do it, authors of plugins used this way will have to test
both cases (I'm glad I insisted on EXEC_BACKEND mode being testable under
Unix ...)

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-01-29 20:59:55
Subject: Re: Modifying and solidifying contrib
Previous:From: Henry B. HotzDate: 2007-01-29 20:44:51
Subject: Re: 10 weeks to feature freeze (Pending Work)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group