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

Re: shared_preload_libraries support on Win32?

From: <korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: shared_preload_libraries support on Win32?
Date: 2007-01-29 22:29:35
Message-ID: 1170109775.8452.192.camel@sakai.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> >> 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?

I thought about that too...  does autovacuum ever need to re-index?  If
so, it seems that it would need access to any index functions (for
function-based indexes) that might reside in a shared_preload_library.

> 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 ...)

And I'm glad that RequestAddinShmemSpace() and RequestAddinLWLocks()
don't complain if called after postmaster start :-)

            -- Korry

  Korry Douglas    korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-01-29 23:10:57
Subject: Re: Modifying and solidifying contrib
Previous:From: googleDate: 2007-01-29 22:23:21
Subject: Re: Getting comments from schema using SQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group