I always bump it up, but usually just to 4096, because I often have queries that are longer than 1024 and I'd like to be able to see the full query. I've never seen any significant memory impact. I suppose if you had thousands of concurrent queries it would add up, but if you only have a few dozen, or even a few hundred queries at any given moment - on a modern system it doesn't seem to impact things very much.
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Jeremy Finzel <finz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have found some examples of people tweaking this > parameter track_activity_query_size to various setting such as 4000, > 10000, 15000, but little discussion as to performance impact on memory > usage. What I don't have a good sense of is how significant this would be > for a high traffic system with rapid connection creation/destruction, say > 1000s per second. In such a case, would there be a reason to hesitate > raising it to 10000 from 1024? Is 10k memory insignificant? Any direction > here is much appreciated, including a good way to benchmark this kind of > thing. > > Thanks! >
