On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Which brings up another point though. I have a personal TODO item to >>> make the comments for operator support functions more consistent: >>> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/21407.1287157...@sss.pgh.pa.us >>> Should we consider removing those comments altogether, instead? > >> I could go either way on that. Most of those comments are pretty >> short, aren't they? How much storage are they really costing us? > > Well, on my machine pg_description is about 210K (per database) as of > HEAD. 90% of its contents are pg_proc entries, though I have no good > fix on how much of that is for internal-use-only functions. A very > rough estimate from counting pg_proc and pg_operator entries suggests > that the answer might be "about a third". So if we do what was said in > the above-cited thread, ie move existing comments to pg_operator and > add boilerplate ones to pg_proc, we probably would pay <100K for it.
I guess that's not enormously expensive, but it's not insignificant either. On my machine, a template database is 5.5MB. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
