Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The reason it seems of concern for 9.0 is that now we have a custom
>> SUSET variable in plpgsql. If we don't fix this then we need to think
>> hard about the alternative of forcing the variable into the core code
>> to avoid the gotchas.
> Well, having reread your proposed solution, it sounds pretty
> reasonable to me. You're never going to be able to make totally
> sensible decisions about GUCs if the code that defines those GUCs
> isn't loaded, so requiring that the code be loaded before any GUCs are
> set seems like a sensible thing to do. On the other hand, if forcing
> this into core gets a beta out the door sooner, maybe that's the way
> to go, even though I wouldn't exactly classify it as an elegant
> solution.
> Or to put it another way - this thread has been sitting idle for 5
> months; it's time to make a decision.
Well, if there are no other comments, I'll push forward with the fix
proposed here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-11/msg00531.php
regards, tom lane