Re: application_name in process name? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mike Blackwell
Subject Re: application_name in process name?
Date
Msg-id CANPAkgtbaxGF8uLX50FAqeEuGCPHUDbWbtqcWVb_2MmShEDKtw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: application_name in process name?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: application_name in process name?
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
It occurs to me that we could also remove the update_process_title GUC:
what you would do is configure a process_title pattern that doesn't
include the %-escape for current command tag, and the infrastructure
could notice that that escape isn't present and skip unnecessary updates.
The same kind of trick could be used for other potentially-expensive
items like the lock "waiting" flag.

This seems like an interesting project for learning my way around gucs and logging.  ​Could you elaborate a little 
on the cost considerations?

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: A Modest Upgrade Proposal
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: application_name in process name?