On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <t...@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?
