Re: shared_preload_libraries support on Win32?

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