Re: explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20180620224203.fqlzl2d3dhvcbe7q@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results (Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
On 2018-Jun-20, Wells Oliver wrote: > I have the follwing in a view to glance at the size of my relations: > > pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass)) AS size, > pg_total_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) AS bytes > > This view sorts by pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) descending. > > The question is: the byte values are often higher for relations with a > lower size indicated by size. As I sit here, I see an 11GB table > of 23821893632 bytes and a 12GB table of 14545387520 bytes, and > lastly/weirdly, a 3194MB table of 19924844544 bytes. This is a strange question. pg_total_relation_size includes the size of indexes and toast table and index, which pg_relation_size does not, so it seems natural that they give wildly different results for differently shaped tables. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: