Rafael Martinez <r.m.guerr...@usit.uio.no> writes:
> I am probably missing the point here, why is it not supposed to show the
> size of the table(data) *without* indexes?
Because pg_relation_size is defined at the "physical" level of showing
one relation, where relation means a pg_class entry. If you want
agglomerations of multiple relations, you can use
pg_total_relation_size, or build your own total if you have some other
usage in mind. The one you propose seems fairly arbitrary --- for
example, if it includes the toast relation, why not the toast relation's
index too? It's not like either one is optional from the user's
standpoint.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
