Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 09:58:52AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> E.g; if user foo then pg_database_size may not be > than X?
>>
>> I guess the big question would be when do we check though? At each
>> transaction seems like it would add significant overhead, especially if
>> we had to rollback the transaction because it was going to go over their
>> quota.
>
> Generally, rolling back a transaction doesn't reduce the amount of disk
> used. Only VACUUM FULL actually shrinks relations.
Right, but what I mean was -- if we rollback because we hit quota we
could potentially cause even more maintenance to have to happen (vacuum).
J
>
> Seem to me if the RelationOpen stores a pointer to a counter that gets
> incremented on mdextend, it should work reasonably well. Extending
> doesn't happen that often relative to other database activity.
>
> Have a nice day,
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
