Re: pg_class.relpages documentation does not mention relpages corner case
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_class.relpages documentation does not mention relpages corner case |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZPoUt3hr57mdwkDR@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | pg_class.relpages documentation does not mention relpages corner case (PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 11:03:49PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/catalog-pg-class.html > Description: > > In the pg_class documentation [1], the relpages column is described as > > >Size of the on-disk representation of this table in pages (of size BLCKSZ). > This is only an estimate used by the planner. It is updated by VACUUM, > ANALYZE, and a few DDL commands such as CREATE INDEX. > > However, it looks like this is -1 for partitioned tables. At least for ones > that have children and have been analyze since adding a child partition, it > seems. I'm not sure how to word that concisely, but should the documentation > note this case? Or can this just be zero for partitioned tales? I'm not sure > if it's too late for that, but they don't actually have any relpages, so it > seems odd that they need a sentinel value. Uh, there are discussions about needing to run ANALYZE on partitioned tables, so in those cases the statistics would be cumulative of all partitions: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230112232747.GA2111950@nathanxps13 If we set the relpages to zero, that would not be reflecting the partitions. I feel -1 is probably the best unless we want to put the total of all partitions in there, but that would be confusing too. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Only you can decide what is important to you.
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: