Re: Parallel safety of binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Here's a single character patch to mark
> that function PARALLEL UNSAFE.

Ugh.  Clearly a bug.

> Obviously that'll affect only newly
> initdb'd clusters after this patch, but that's what people have in a
> pg_upgrade scenario.

We're a bit fortunate on that.  I wonder if there's some less
trial-and-error way of discovering that functions are or are not
parallel safe.

> This goes back to d89f06f0482 so I think it should probably be
> back-patched to 9.6 and 10.

Roger, will do.

            regards, tom lane