[PATCH] Explain what the default output_plugin_libraries do

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: [PATCH] Explain what the default output_plugin_libraries do
Date: 2026-09-10 16:46:41
Message-ID: CAOYmi+mt5bcV6B0DZR-t1tfpX8wjk8Aj+ftEd=xXuH5qege2+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 5:43 AM Jacob Champion
<jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> (The role of each builtin plugin should probably be
> better explained in the documentation for output_plugin_libraries,
> since this is a brand-new consideration for most people...)

Splitting this concern off from the original report: I'd like to
backpatch something like the attached so that it's more obvious why
you might (or might not) want to keep those in the list in the first
place.

WDYT?

Thanks,
--Jacob

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-doc-Improve-output_plugin_libraries-documentation.patch application/octet-stream 3.9 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Maksim.Melnikov 2026-09-10 16:49:55 Race between prepared transaction commit and checkpointer
Previous Message Sami Imseih 2026-09-10 16:39:34 Re: pgstat: Flush some statistics within running transactions, take 2