Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19998.1120605857@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > If we go pg_table_size() and pg_relation_size(), which is object-only > and which is heap + index + toast? I think ideally we want > pg_relation_size to be the combined one, but then we have pg_table_size > that works on indexes and toast too, and that is confusing, and we don't > want to add index and toast versions. Or is an index a relation? And > TOAST? All the backend code thinks so --- anything that has an entry in pg_class is a relation. So personally I don't find "table" and "relation" confusing in this context. But I can see it might be confusing to people not familiar with PG jargon. > OK, how about pg_relation_size for heap/index/toast, and > pg_complete_relation_size for the combined total. I could live with that. Or "pg_total_relation_size". regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: