On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 08:51:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 04:10:33PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > This topic has been raised multiple time over the years, and I don't see any > > objection to add such an annotation at least for all GUC variables (either > > the > > direct variables or the indirect variables set during the hook execution), > > so > > PFA a patch that takes care of all the GUC. > > > > I don't now if that's still an option at that point, but backporting to at > > least pg14 if that patch is accepted would be quite helpful. > > These are usually just applied on HEAD
Yeah but 14 isn't released yet, and this is a really low risk change. > , and on a parameter-basis based > on requests from extension authors. If you wish to make your > extensions able to work on Windows, that's a good idea, but I would > recommend to limit this exercise to what's really necessary for your > purpose. I disagree. For random global variables I agree that we shouldn't mark them all blindly, but for GUCs it's pretty clear that they're intended to be accessible from any caller, including extensions. Why treating Windows as a second-class citizen, especially when any change can only be used a year after someone complained?
