Michael Goldner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 11/5/07 12:19 AM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It might be interesting to look at stats such as
>> select sum(length(data)) from pg_largeobject;
>> to confirm that your 100GB estimate for the data payload is accurate.
> That select retur
On 11/5/07 12:19 AM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Goldner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The pg_largeobject table, however, seems a bit odd:
>
>> INFO: vacuuming "pg_catalog.pg_largeobject"
>> INFO: index "pg_largeobject_loid_pn_index" now contains 105110204 row
>> version
Michael Goldner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The pg_largeobject table, however, seems a bit odd:
> INFO: vacuuming "pg_catalog.pg_largeobject"
> INFO: index "pg_largeobject_loid_pn_index" now contains 105110204 row
> versions in 404151 pages
> DETAIL: 778599 index row versions were removed.
>
On 11/4/07 8:26 PM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Michael Goldner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I have a database with a single table that includes an oid reference to a
>> large object. After loading 100GB of large objects using lo_import(), I
>> find that my total database size has
"Michael Goldner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a database with a single table that includes an oid reference to a
> large object. After loading 100GB of large objects using lo_import(), I
> find that my total database size has grown by about 270GB. What is the
> reason for the difference
