Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > > Florian Weimer wrote:
> > >> The sizes displayed by \dt+ in version 8.4.2 do not take TOAST tables
> > >> into account, presumably because the pg_relation_size does not reflect
> > >> that, either. I think this is a bit surprising. From a user
> > >> perspective, these are part of the table storage (I understand that
> > >> the indices might be a different story, but TOAST table are a fairly
> > >> deep implementation detail and should perhaps be hidden here).
> >
> > > As of last week there's a new pg_table_size available that does what you
> > > want here:
> > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00288.php
> >
> > > I don't believe \dt+ has been updated yet to use that though; that's
> > > worth considering for a minute, not sure anybody thought about it yet.
> >
> > We could only use pg_table_size against a backend >= 9.0, which would
> > mean that the displayed results mean something different depending on
> > which backend version psql is being used with. That's not necessarily
> > a deal-breaker, but it does seem a bit evil.
>
> Perhaps we can emulate pg_table_size on earlier server versions, using a
> query which provides the sum of table plus toast items. It would be a
> bit slower, but the normal case of using the same server version would
> be fast.
Added to TODO:
Consider showing TOAST and index sizes in \dt+
* http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-01/msg00912.php
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
