On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
--On 28. März 2011 13:38:23 +0100 Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
But I think we can just call pg_table_size() regardless in 9.0+; I
believe it'll return the same results as pg_relation_size() on
non-tables.
--On 28. März 2011 13:38:23 +0100 Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
But I think we can just call pg_table_size() regardless in 9.0+; I
believe it'll return the same results as pg_relation_size() on
non-tables. Anyone see a problem with that?
Hmm yeah, seems i was thinking too
--On 26. März 2011 21:59:18 -0400 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
But I think we can just call pg_table_size() regardless in 9.0+; I
believe it'll return the same results as pg_relation_size() on
non-tables. Anyone see a problem with that?
Hmm yeah, seems i was thinking too
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the acurate
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of vie mar 25 02:48:49 -0300 2011:
2011/3/24 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
can we enhance a detail for table and show more accurate numbers?
table size: xxx
toast
2011/3/25 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of vie mar 25 02:48:49 -0300 2011:
2011/3/24 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
can we enhance a detail for table and
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/3/23 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
It stroke me
2011/3/24 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
2011/3/23 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle
Hello Bernd,
On 21.03.2011 18:44, Bernd Helmle wrote:
Attached minor patch extends \dt to use pg_table_size() starting with
PostgreSQL 9.0, not sure if we backport such changes though. It would
be interesting for 9.1, however.
As I already told you:
I tested and it worked.
The code looks
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the acurate table size
for tables, since it uses pg_relation_size() till now. With having
pg_table_size() since PostgreSQL 9.0 available, i believe it would be more
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the acurate table size
for tables, since it uses pg_relation_size() till now. With having
2011/3/23 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 23 17:24:59 -0300 2011:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the acurate table size
for tables, since
2011/3/22 David Fetter da...@fetter.org:
+1 for fixing this behavior in 9.1. -1 for changing in 9.0, as the
change in behavior mid-release will cause more confusion than the
incomplete accounting does.
Idem.
Cheers,
David.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 06:44:51PM +0100, Bernd Helmle wrote:
+1 for fixing this behavior in 9.1. -1 for changing in 9.0, as the
change in behavior mid-release will cause more confusion than the
incomplete accounting does.
Cheers,
David.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 06:44:51PM +0100, Bernd Helmle wrote:
It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the
15 matches
Mail list logo
