| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should shared_preload_libraries be loaded during binary upgrade? |
| Date: | 2025-05-01 13:47:46 |
| Message-ID: | aBN7gqSuVVZZtoKD@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 11:05:56AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> Does it make sense to load "shared_preload_libraries" during binary
> upgrade mode?
>
> An extension might unintentionally interfere with pg_upgrade, for
> example, by connecting to the 'postgres' database, which can cause the
> upgrade to fail as the restore needs to drop that database. While it's
> true that extensions should ideally handle this themselves, wouldn't
> it be safer if we could avoid loading them at all during the binary
> upgrade mode?
Well, the library might be required to load the data. Why would we
avoid it with no known error reports?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-05-01 14:05:48 | Re: Should shared_preload_libraries be loaded during binary upgrade? |
| Previous Message | Japin Li | 2025-05-01 13:47:14 | Re: Fix outdated comments for IndexInfo |