Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off
Date: 2016-08-23 20:58:02
Message-ID: CAM3SWZR7hJzEqQLf9yPejMqsOgGWoyCTV=D0nJ_L3iUfw0aTbQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> [Windows]
>> #clients on off
>> 12 29793 38169
>> 24 31587 87237
>> 48 32588 83335
>> 96 34261 67668
>
> This ranges from a 28% to a 97% speed improvement on Windows! Those are
> not typos! This is a game-changer for use of Postgres on Windows for
> certain workloads!

While I don't care all that much about performance on windows, it is a
little sad that it took this long to fix something so simple. Consider
this exchange, as a further example of our lack of concern here:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/30619.1428157653@sss.pgh.pa.us

ISTM that we don't even care about Windows performance to a minimal
degree. Hopefully, the ICU stuff Peter Eisentraut is working on will
level the playing field here a little bit, if only as an accidental
side-effect.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2016-08-23 21:02:05 Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2016-08-23 20:44:01 Re: [RFC] Change the default of update_process_title to off