| From: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: db stats vs table stats |
| Date: | 2007-02-23 22:06:34 |
| Message-ID: | 200702231506.34413.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Oops, typo: I reversed the inequality. I've corrected it below.
On Friday February 23 2007 2:02 pm, Ed L. wrote:
> I've been periodically collecting the stats stored in
> pg_statio_all_tables and pg_stat_database for ~30 different
> clusters, and have noticed a curiosity.
>
> I would have thought that for a given period, the change in
> pg_stat_database.blks_read would be >= the sum of the changes
> in pg_statio_user_tables.heap_blks_read +
> pg_statio_user_tables.idx_blks_read +
> pg_statio_user_tables.toast_blks_read +
> pg_statio_user_tables.tidx_blks_read.
>
> In short, the total would be >= heap + idx + toast + idx for
> user tables.
>
> It does not appear that way. The table-level IO stats appear
> to be typically 1-2 orders of magnitude larger than the
> db-level stats. Can anyone explain that?
>
> TIA.
> Ed
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2007-02-23 22:08:38 | Re: complex referential integrity constraints |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-02-23 22:02:15 | Re: [HACKERS] 5 Weeks till feature freeze or (do you know where your patch is?) |