On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 7:27 PM John Naylor
<john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 7:15 AM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, the problem isn't really the additional disk space it
> > would require. The problem is the additional performance hit and
> > memory overhead, as the catalog names are part of the internal
> > syscache.
>
> Some actual numbers on recent hardware would show what kind of tradeoff is involved. No one has done that for a long
timethat I recall.
Agreed, but I don't have access to such hardware. However this won't
influence the memory overhead part, and there is already frequent
problems with that, especially since declarative partitioning, so I
don't see how we could afford that without some kind of cache TTL or
similar. AFAIR the last discussion about it a few years ago didn't
lead anywhere :(
