Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Although NAMEDATALEN=128 would be needed for full SQL compliance,
>> the space penalty seems severe.

> What will the impact be on a medium to large production database? In
> other words, is the bloat strictly to the system catalogs based on how
> extensive your database schema (bad choice of words now, but I don't
> know a better term for this) is? Or will the bloat scale with the size
> of the database including data?

The bloat would scale with the size of your schema, not with the amount
of data in your tables (unless you have "name" columns in your user
tables, which is something we've always discouraged). template1 is
clearly a worst-case scenario, percentagewise, for NAMEDATALEN.

I'm quite prepared to believe that the net cost is "a couple megs per
database" more or less independent of how much data you store. Maybe
that's negligible these days, or maybe it isn't ...

regards, tom lane