On 23.11.2012 17:53, Tom Lane wrote:
Euler Taveira<euler@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 22-11-2012 04:27, Pavel Stehule wrote:
significantly larger catalog
Less than 5% of catalog columns? I don't buy your argument.
It's not about count, it's about size. For instance, pg_attribute
currently requires 140 bytes per row (counting the tuple header and
line pointer), so adding 64 bytes would represent 45% bloat. In
a database with lots of tables that would be painful.
We could avoid this problem if we were prepared to make type "name"
be varlena, ...
It would actually be nice to do that because it would *reduce* the
amount of space and memory used for the catalogs in the typical case,
where the attribute names are much smaller than 64 bytes. I received a
complaint just the other day that our backend processes consume a lot of
memory, even when idle; the catalog caches are a large part of that.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
