Re: Table size does not include toast size
Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
From: Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>
To: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Rafael Martinez <r.m.guerrero@usit.uio.no>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2009-12-22T14:11:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
--On 21. Dezember 2009 12:02:02 -0500 Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> 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 >> > Right; that's exactly the way I'm computing things now, I just have to > crawl way too much catalog data to do it. I also agree that if we > provide pg_table_size, the issue of "pg_relation_size doesn't do what I > want" goes away without needing to even change the existing > documentation--people don't come to that section looking for "relation", > they're looking for "table". > > Bernd, there's a basic spec if you have time to work on this. I see if i can get some time for it during christmas vacation (its on my radar for a longer period of time). I'm still working on this NOT NULL pg_constraint representation and would like to propose a patch fairly soon for this. -- Thanks Bernd