> On Nov 11, 2026, at 00:30, Matheus Alcantara <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue Nov 10, 2026 at 11:24 AM -03, Mahendrakar Srinivasarao wrote:
>>> The attached v3 includes a 0002 that fixes the docs for this.
>> 
>> I can reproduce it: with extension_control_path = '$system/foo',
>> pg_available_extensions returns no rows and CREATE EXTENSION fails with
>> "component in parameter "extension_control_path" is not an absolute
>> path". It's even more confusing when combined with a valid element:
>> with extension_control_path = '$system/foo:$system',
>> pg_available_extensions lists the extensions from $system (the bad
>> element is silently skipped as a nonexistent directory), but CREATE
>> EXTENSION on any of them still fails with the same error, because
>> find_in_paths() rejects the first element before it gets to $system.
>> 
>> 
>> 0002 looks good and is included in v4 unchanged.
>> 
> 
> Thanks for checking!
> 
>> Two related things I noticed while testing:
>> 
>> - The long_desc of extension_control_path in guc_parameters.dat
>>  (guc_tables.c on 18) has the same "loaded from the same directory
>>  where the primary control file was found" sentence that 0001 fixes in
>>  config.sgml. The new 0003 adjusts it to match. Since it's a
>>  translatable string, I've kept it separate and meant it for master
>>  only, so 0001 and 0002 can be backpatched without it.
>> 
> 
> Good.
> 
>> - The '$system/foo:$system' inconsistency comes from find_in_paths()
>>  and pg_available_extensions handling an invalid element differently,
>>  and from nothing validating the value when it's set. Would a check
>>  hook that rejects such elements at SET time be worth pursuing? One
>>  concern is that it could break existing setups: a value like
>>  '$system:$system/foo' works today for any extension found in $system,
>>  but with a check hook it would be rejected, and in postgresql.conf
>>  that would prevent the server from starting after an upgrade.
>>  dynamic_library_path also only validates its elements when they're
>>  used. If there's interest I can start a separate thread for that;
>>  it's not addressed in v4.
>> 
> 
> This seems related with another discussion about an
> extension_control_path bug [1] that accepts an empty path element and
> append /extension by mistake. I think that we can discuss about this
> case on this other thread.
> 
>> v4-0001 and v4-0002 are rebased on current master and apply cleanly to
>> REL_19_STABLE and REL_18_STABLE; the docs build without warnings.
>> v4-0003 applies on master (and REL_19_STABLE, if wanted there); it
>> builds and passes make check.
> 
> v4 looks good to me, thanks! 
> 

V4 LGTM too.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/






Reply via email to