On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:01:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > > Based on a couple of independent reports from users with no idea how > > to judge the progress of a system recovering from a crash, Christoph > > and I wondered if we should override update_process_title for the > > "recovering ..." message, at least until connections are allowed. We > > already do that to set the initial titles. > > > Crash recovery is a rare case where important information is reported > > through the process title that isn't readily available anywhere else, > > since you can't log in. If you want to gauge progress on a system > > that happened to crash with update_process_title set to off, your best > > hope is probably to trace the process or spy on the files it has open, > > to see which WAL segment it's accessing, but that's not very nice. > > Seems like a good argument, but you'd have to be careful about the > final state when you stop overriding update_process_title --- it can't > be left looking like it's still-in-progress on some random WAL file. > (Compare my nearby gripes about walsenders being sloppy about their > pg_stat_activity and process title presentations.)
Related: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/2688/ I'm not sure I understood Michael's recent message, but I think maybe refers to promotion of a standby. -- Justin
