Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > ... It seems that we used to have > some kind of LRU algorithm to prevent excessive memory usage, but we > rippped it out because it was too expensive (see commit > 8b9bc234ad43dfa788bde40ebf12e94f16556b7f).
Not only was it too expensive, but performance fell off a cliff as soon as you had a catalog working set large enough to cause the code to actually do something, I'm not in favor of putting anything like that back in ---- people who have huge catalogs will just start complaining about something different, ie, why did their apps get so much slower. The short answer here is "if you want a database with 100000 tables, you'd better be running it on more than desktop-sized hardware". regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers