Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> ... Do we really want to crack down on
> extension libraries that wouldn't work in shared_preload_libraries?
That is, perhaps, a fair question; but I see little benefit to users
in such a library design. Most people who are using a library heavily
would likely wish to have it preloaded.
> What about hypothetical libraries that are smart enough to avoid
> making such calls when they detect that they're running from
> shared_preload_libraries -- you'd generate false warnings when loaded
> the regular way.
I find that argument too thin to take seriously. If the library
can manage that, it might as well just postpone the calls all the
time, rather than have two different operating modes that would
require separate testing. What would be the advantage of the
extra complication?
regards, tom lane