Re: [HACKERS] Syncing sql extension versions with shared library versions

No :). But we have a lot of (most of) code that is not user-called-functions (planner/other hooks etc.). It seems dangerous to update that code in the .so and have it possibly affect customers that are using old versions of the extension. While it's possible to do that kind of _v1 suffix code for planner functions as well, this seems like a nightmare in terms of code maintenance (we already have 1000s of lines of C code). I think a dynamic loader might be more work upfront but have major payoffs for speed of development in the long term for us. It may also have advantages in terms of update safety.  It's also worth noting that our C code has some SPI upcalls, so keeping some sync between the sql and C code is even more of an issue for us (if we can't make the dynamic/stub loader approach work, this might be an anti-pattern and we may have to review doing upcalls at all).