In regards to the issue posted @ https://rudderstack.slack.com/archives/C01E4PLB135/p1669343765161009 , we're running into similar issues. Through BigQuery audit logs we observe that rudderstack's process to maintain the users table makes up 9% of our BigQuery bill. For us, we don't even use this generated table since we have our own process to aggregate data from the identifies table. In general I would think many customers are better off paying this cost a few times a day when they refresh their analytics tables (e.g.: via DBT scheduled runs), vs every rudderstack warehouse sync which is far more often. With Google raising the prices of BigQuery by 25% EOM, there's likely a lot of interest amongst people to save some money on their bill. Is this a known issue, or in general would the team be open to accepting a PR to selectively disable the generation of the users table?

@dazzling-petabyte-60244 Team is discussing this and there are a couple of ways to handle this. You can expect some changes to be available in a couple of weeks. Will let you know when we push it to prod.

Hey @quiet-wolf-72320, just following up here if there's any way to disable this now?

Hi Joseph, yes this is available now. You can setup a transformation to add this integrations object to your code. Happy to help with the User transformation if you need further assistance. https://www.rudderstack.com/docs/destinations/warehouse-destinations/warehouse-schema/#skip-sending-data-to-users-table

Awesome, thank you! I'll give this a go 🙂