Re: Weirdness using Executor Hooks

From: Eric Ridge <eebbrr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Weirdness using Executor Hooks
Date: 2015-06-19 00:07:51
Message-ID: CANcm6wacpL6W+dR6_MsN3y7qKdbUrQRLA6b_rDAGCgtt2EXxow@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> What we were expecting I guess is that such functions would be declared
> to reference the library underneath $libdir/plugins, not that you'd use
> a symlink.

According to pg_proc.probin, all 32 of my C language functions point
to $libdir/my_extension_lib, which makes sense because as part of the
extension .sql I declare them as LANGUAGE c AS 'MODULE_PATHNAME', and
MODULE_PATHNAME gets substituted by make.

So are you saying that we should instead declare them AS
'$libdir/plugins/my_extension_lib' so that it matches what's happening
in local_preload_libraries? And is it safe to directly update
pg_proc.probin (and ya know, terminate all existing backends)?

Thanks so much for your time!

eric

ps, I think if we just changed our deploy process to terminate
existing backends this would just disappear, yeah?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-06-19 00:17:30 Re: dblink: add polymorphic functions - review
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2015-06-18 23:19:04 Re: Inheritance planner CPU and memory usage change since 9.3.2