Re: DBSize backend integration

From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DBSize backend integration
Date: 2005-06-25 07:04:11
Message-ID: 42BD01EB.5090600@pse-consulting.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dave Page wrote:

>
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us]
>>Sent: 24 June 2005 21:07
>>To: Dave Page
>>Cc: PostgreSQL-development
>>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DBSize backend integration
>>
>>
>>
>>>>So drop total_relation_size(),
>>>>
>>>>
>>relation_size_components(), and what
>>
>>
>>>>else?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>indexes_size()
>>>
>>>
>>What is the logic for removing that? Because it is an
>>aggregate of all
>>indexes?
>>
>>
>
>Yes, and is of limited use in my opinion. I can see a use for
>pg_relation_size when used on an individual index, but the total of all
>indexes on a relation seems of little real use to me (and is relatively
>easily calculated if it really is required for a more specialised
>purpose).
>
>
>
[from memory] the relation_components function adds components in a
questionable way, e.g. counting on index on the toast table as index. To
me, that's internal implementation detail, and should be counted as
toast table size too.

Regards,
Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-06-25 09:13:10 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2005-06-25 05:41:19 #ifdef NOT_USED