Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gurjeet Singh
Тема Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends
Дата
Msg-id 65937bea0809300545t9476c3dv489c34860e6fbac3@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends  (Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>)
Ответы Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com> wrote:
Hi,

Le mardi 30 septembre 2008, Heikki Linnakangas a écrit :
> pg_relation_size() doesn't include the size of the FSM. Should it? I'm
> thinking "no", but pg_total_relation_size() should.

What's practical about pg_relation_size() and pg_total_relation_size() as of
8.3 is that the diff is the cumulated indexes storage volume. Your proposal
makes it harder to get this information, but sounds good otherwise.
Would it be possible to add in some new APIs to?
 a. pg_relation_size()
 b. pg_relation_fsm_size()
 c. pg_relation_indexes_size()
 d. pg_total_relation_size() = a + b + c

You forgot the toast size.

Best regards,
--
gurjeet[.singh]@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | indiatimes | yahoo }.com

EnterpriseDB      http://www.enterprisedb.com

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Dimitri Fontaine
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends
Следующее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends