Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqQ=aR32HrNwRZM3DR6i5etER+3yM8__uRFrSfeGRFGBfw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 1. The performance gain is huge.
> 2. It's almost useless because we can only see the postgres command line with Process Explorer, which the user must
downloadfrom Microsoft and install. 
> 3. I don't see the benefit of update_process_title=on at the expense of performance.
> 4. The default setting of PostgreSQL parameters should be friendly.  I'm afraid many users cannot track the cause of
poorperformance to update_process_title.  I heard that MySQL's popularity was partly because it ran smoothly on Windows
inthe early days.  PostgreSQL should be, too. 
>
> The question is, do we want to change the default to off on other OSes?

I don't think so.

> Is the command line really useful?
> If useful, does it need to be on by default?

I'd vote for keeping it on by default, because this information with
ps is really useful for any kind of deployments, testing, etc.

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.
--
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: New version numbering practices
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Oddity in EXPLAIN for foreign/custom join pushdown plans