| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Carlos Costa Portela <ccosta(at)servidores(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Great change (size of data dir) upgrading postgresql |
| Date: | 2004-01-18 23:09:19 |
| Message-ID: | 6576.1074467359@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> The other thing is the reindex.
I favor the index-bloat idea as well, but it'd be a good idea to verify.
An easy check to make is to see which rows in pg_class have the largest
relpages values.
> Of course you could look at the files within the data/base directory tree and
> see which of those are consuming alot of disk space. These files are named
> after the oid, in pg_class, of the entity they contain.
Correction: data files are named per the relfilenode column of pg_class.
Database directories, however, are named per pg_database.oid.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Bowden | 2004-01-19 00:01:32 | Re: serverless postgresql |
| Previous Message | Nigel J. Andrews | 2004-01-18 22:18:36 | Re: sequence incrementing twice |