Обсуждение: explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка

explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results

От
Wells Oliver
Дата:
I have the follwing in a view to glance at the size of my relations:

pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass)) AS size,
pg_total_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) AS bytes

This view sorts by pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) descending.

The question is: the byte values are often higher for relations with a lower size indicated by size. As I sit here, I see an 11GB table of 23821893632 bytes and a 12GB table of 14545387520 bytes, and lastly/weirdly, a 3194MB table of 19924844544 bytes.

Can someone give me the quck explainer here of what I am looking at? I tend to trust the size more than the bytes but I want to understand both better.

Thanks.

--

Re: explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results

От
Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
On 2018-Jun-20, Wells Oliver wrote:

> I have the follwing in a view to glance at the size of my relations:
> 
> pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass)) AS size,
> pg_total_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) AS bytes
> 
> This view sorts by pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) descending.
> 
> The question is: the byte values are often higher for relations with a
> lower size indicated by size. As I sit here, I see an 11GB table
> of 23821893632 bytes and a 12GB table of 14545387520 bytes, and
> lastly/weirdly, a 3194MB table of 19924844544 bytes.

This is a strange question.  pg_total_relation_size includes the size of
indexes and toast table and index, which pg_relation_size does not, so
it seems natural that they give wildly different results for differently
shaped tables.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


Re: explaining the pg_total_relation_size/pg_relation_size results

От
"David G. Johnston"
Дата:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com> wrote:
I have the follwing in a view to glance at the size of my relations:

pg_size_pretty(pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass)) AS size,
pg_total_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) AS bytes

This view sorts by pg_relation_size(c.oid::regclass) descending.

The question is: the byte values are often higher for relations with a lower size indicated by size. As I sit here, I see an 11GB table of 23821893632 bytes and a 12GB table of 14545387520 bytes, and lastly/weirdly, a 3194MB table of 19924844544 bytes.

Can someone give me the quck explainer here of what I am looking at? I tend to trust the size more than the bytes but I want to understand both better.

​The documented difference between the two size functions are "indexes" and "toast" (and the non-main forks which are a small fraction of the difference).  Any observation of an inverse relationship between the two doesn't seem actionable...

Toast is basically "automatic large object storage"; I leave the docs to cover indexes.

David J.