-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 6/29/2005 2:16 AM
To: Dave Page
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches; PostgreSQL-development
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Dbsize backend integration
> OK, so you went with relation as heap/index/toast only, and table as the
> total of them. I am not sure that makes sense because we usually equate
> relation with table, and an index isn't a relation, really.
Err, yes - posted that before I got your reply!
> Do we have to use pg_object_size? Is there a better name? Are
> indexes/toasts even objects?
Yeah, I think perhaps pg_object_size is better in some ways than
pg_relation_size, however I stuck with relation because (certainly in pgAdmin
world) we tend to think of pretty much anything as an object. I could go either
way on that though, however Michael doesn't seem so keen.
So, one for pg_object_size, one on the fench and one against :-). Anyone else
got a preference?
Regards, Dave.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
