Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> To answer Rafael's concerns directly: you're right that this is
> confusing. pg_relation_size is always going to do what it does right
> now just because of how that fits into the design of the database.
> However, the documentation should be updated to warn against the issue
> with TOAST here. And it should be easier to get the total you're like
> to see here: main relation + toasted parts, since that's what most DBAs
> want in this area.
Perhaps invent pg_table_size() = base table + toast table + toast index
and pg_indexes_size() = all other indexes for table
giving us the property pg_table_size + pg_indexes_size =
pg_total_relation_size
I think the 8.4 documentation already makes it apparent that
pg_relation_size is a pretty low-level number. If we invent other
functions with obvious names, that should be sufficient.
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
