Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example
Date
Msg-id 20230603111547.khnaf7rzo4ydy3ys@jrouhaud
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example  (Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jun 03, 2023 at 02:09:26PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
>
> Additionally I noticed that the check:
>
> ```
>         if (!process_shared_preload_libraries_in_progress)
>                 return;
> ```
>
> ... was misplaced in _PG_init(). Here is the patch v2 which fixes this too.

I'm pretty sure that this is intentional.  The worker can be launched
dynamically and in that case it still needs a GUC for the naptime.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example
Next
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example