Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example

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.