| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off |
| Date: | 2016-08-04 13:48:26 |
| Message-ID: | 31974.1470318506@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2016-08-04 16:48:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Here is a different proposal: documenting instead that disabling that
>> parameter on Windows can improve performance, at the cost of losing
>> information verbosity for processes.
> The benefit on windows seems pretty marginal, given the way it has to be
> viewed. People installing processexplorer et. al. to view a handle that
> have to know about, will be able to change the config.
Yeah, I think I agree. It would be bad to disable it by default on
Unix, because ps(1) is a very standard tool there, but the same argument
doesn't hold for Windows.
Another route to a solution would be to find a cheaper way to update
the process title on Windows ... has anyone looked for alternatives?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-08-04 13:52:21 | Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-04 13:45:47 | Re: New version numbering practices |