Re: Table size does not include toast size
От | Cédric Villemain |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Table size does not include toast size |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e94e14cd0912220246j361bdf0bif55f6ce666f42c95@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Table size does not include toast size (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Table size does not include toast size
Re: Table size does not include toast size |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2009/12/21 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> To answer Rafael's concerns directly: you're right that this is >> confusing. pg_relation_size is always going to do what it does right >> now just because of how that fits into the design of the database. >> However, the documentation should be updated to warn against the issue >> with TOAST here. And it should be easier to get the total you're like >> to see here: main relation + toasted parts, since that's what most DBAs >> want in this area. > > Perhaps invent pg_table_size() = base table + toast table + toast index > and pg_indexes_size() = all other indexes for table > giving us the property pg_table_size + pg_indexes_size = > pg_total_relation_size Did you mean :pg_table_size() = base table + toast tablepg_indexes_size() = base indexes + toast indexes ? > > I think the 8.4 documentation already makes it apparent that > pg_relation_size is a pretty low-level number. If we invent other > functions with obvious names, that should be sufficient. > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: