From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ken Caruso <ken(at)ipl31(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Bloat and Slow Vacuum Time on Toast |
Date: | 2011-07-20 03:12:26 |
Message-ID: | 28552.1311131546@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Ken Caruso <ken(at)ipl31(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Ken Caruso <ken(at)ipl31(dot)net> writes:
>>> If I look at the total relation size using the following query:
>>> SELECT SUM(pg_relation_size(pg_class.oid)) FROM pg_class ;
>>> This says the total size is around 191GB.
>> What PG version?
> 9.0.4
OK, so you need to worry about alternate forks. Your query is the same
as
select sum(pg_relation_size(oid, 'main')) from pg_class;
I bet you'll find that the difference is accounted for by one of
select sum(pg_relation_size(oid, 'fsm')) from pg_class;
select sum(pg_relation_size(oid, 'vm')) from pg_class;
Drill down and see which table is responsible ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2011-07-20 13:32:43 | Re: 9.0.4 Data corruption issue |
Previous Message | Ken Caruso | 2011-07-20 02:17:13 | Re: Bloat and Slow Vacuum Time on Toast |