  Euclidean spanners are important geometric structures, having found numerous
applications over the years. Cornerstone results in this area from the late 80s
and early 90s state that for any $d$-dimensional $n$-point Euclidean space,
there exists a $(1+\epsilon)$-spanner with $nO(\epsilon^{-d+1})$ edges and
lightness $O(\epsilon^{-2d})$. Surprisingly, the fundamental question of
whether or not these dependencies on $\epsilon$ and $d$ for small $d$ can be
improved has remained elusive, even for $d = 2$. This question naturally arises
in any application of Euclidean spanners where precision is a necessity.
  The state-of-the-art bounds $nO(\epsilon^{-d+1})$ and $O(\epsilon^{-2d})$ on
the size and lightness of spanners are realized by the {\em greedy} spanner. In
2016, Filtser and Solomon proved that, in low dimensional spaces, the greedy
spanner is near-optimal. The question of whether the greedy spanner is truly
optimal remained open to date.
  The contribution of this paper is two-fold. We resolve these longstanding
questions by nailing down the exact dependencies on $\epsilon$ and $d$ and
showing that the greedy spanner is truly optimal. Specifically, for any $d=
O(1), \epsilon = \Omega({n}^{-\frac{1}{d-1}})$:
  - We show that any $(1+\epsilon)$-spanner must have $n
\Omega(\epsilon^{-d+1})$ edges, implying that the greedy (and other) spanners
achieve the optimal size.
  - We show that any $(1+\epsilon)$-spanner must have lightness
$\Omega(\epsilon^{-d})$, and then improve the upper bound on the lightness of
the greedy spanner from $O(\epsilon^{-2d})$ to $O(\epsilon^{-d})$.
  We then complement our negative result for the size of spanners with a rather
counterintuitive positive result: Steiner points lead to a quadratic
improvement in the size of spanners! Our bound for the size of Steiner spanners
is tight as well (up to lower-order terms).
