From: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)fdr(dot)io> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Extra files in "base" dir not seen in relfilenodes |
Date: | 2018-01-16 23:08:35 |
Message-ID: | CACN56+Pb+XH_8iu=jcmAk4QcuGwahHY7geft14jaAZk6T-48oA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 3:04 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Daniel Farina <daniel(at)fdr(dot)io> writes:
> > I am looking at a database with a wide (~500G) divergence between the
> total
> > space expended by the database directory and the result of select
> > sum(pg_relation_size(oid)) from pg_class;.
>
> Odd.
>
> > I located about 280G of apparent extra space by performing an anti-join
> > between files on disk and files in the catalog via the
> pg_class.relfilenode
> > field.
>
> Umm ... are you accounting for catalogs that have zeroes in
> pg_class.relfilenode? It's generally better to rely on the
> pg_relation_filenode(oid) function than the raw column contents.
>
Yeah, the catalogs are not considered here (oids < 10000). The oids in
question are rather high. Let me re-run the antijoin with the function
though....
Indeed, same result.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-16 23:18:23 | Re: Extra files in "base" dir not seen in relfilenodes |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-16 23:03:58 | Re: Extra files in "base" dir not seen in relfilenodes |