Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> If we go pg_table_size() and pg_relation_size(), which is object-only
> and which is heap + index + toast? I think ideally we want
> pg_relation_size to be the combined one, but then we have pg_table_size
> that works on indexes and toast too, and that is confusing, and we don't
> want to add index and toast versions. Or is an index a relation? And
> TOAST?
All the backend code thinks so --- anything that has an entry in
pg_class is a relation. So personally I don't find "table" and
"relation" confusing in this context. But I can see it might be
confusing to people not familiar with PG jargon.
> OK, how about pg_relation_size for heap/index/toast, and
> pg_complete_relation_size for the combined total.
I could live with that. Or "pg_total_relation_size".
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
