On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki <
tsunakawa.ta...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > 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.
> It seems that we could reach a consensus.  The patch is attached.  I'll
> add this to the next CommitFest.
> > Another route to a solution would be to find a cheaper way to update the
> > process title on Windows ... has anyone looked for alternatives?
> I couldn't find an alternative solution after asking some Windows support
> staff.

FWIW, I remember this from back in the days when this was written. We kind
of expected this would be slow already back then, but couldn't find a
better way at the time either. And back then, I guess there were just
enough *other* things that were slow with pg-on-windows that it didn't
become as obvious.

So - +1 for changing the defaults as suggested.

What's our take on backpatching such changes? Should this be 9.6 only, or
back further?

 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Reply via email to