| From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans Guijt <hg(at)terma(dot)com>, Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_relation_size performance issue |
| Date: | 2015-06-04 14:33:24 |
| Message-ID: | 557061B4.3060706@aklaver.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 06/04/2015 07:24 AM, Hans Guijt wrote:
> Thanks, this is most helpful. I originally found that query somewhere on
> the internet and used it as-is.
>
> If I drop the restriction on table name I get a list that also includes
> indexes, constraints, etc. Is there a way to restrict the returned set
> to tables only?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/interactive/catalog-pg-class.html
relkind = 'r'
>
> Hans Guijt
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc Mamin | 2015-06-04 15:08:20 | Re: Row visibility issue with consecutive triggers, one being DEFERRED |
| Previous Message | Melvin Davidson | 2015-06-04 14:31:24 | Re: pg_relation_size performance issue |