Dave Page wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew@dunslane.net]
> > Sent: 24 June 2005 21:12
> > To: Bruce Momjian
> > Cc: Dave Page; PostgreSQL-development
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DBSize backend integration
> >
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >So drop total_relation_size(), relation_size_components(), and what
> > >else?
> >
> > But these answer easily the question I see most asked - how
> > much space
> > in total does the relation occupy. I'd like to see at least one of
> > these, properly named and fixed w.r.t. schemas. Getting
> > total_relation_size() from relation_size_components() would
> > be easy, so
> > if we only keep one then keep relation_size_components().
>
> relation_size_components() depends on total_relation_size() (which I
> have to agree could be useful). I think relation_size_components() is
> unecessary though - it looks like it was designed to show a summary
> rather than as a view to be used by other clients (if that makes
> sense!).
I agree that total_relation_size() is quite useful at least when used from
the command line. It should give you the correct answer to what space a
table including indexes and _toast_tables_ occupies.
I am not sure about relation_size_components.
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold