> I've commited a fix for this.  Looks like the direct manipulation of GUC
> vars
> is not possible under win32, instead we must use the GUC helper functions.

I have a question as to the performance implications of this...

This change means that we now call set_config_option() not once, but
twice, for each row that gets replicated.

Do we have any idea of what negative impact that has on performance?

I don't at all mind assigning an integer value in there; I'm quite
concerned that the GUC function calls may be considerably more
expensive...