Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

pg_* files are too large for empty database.

From: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: pg_* files are too large for empty database.
Date: 2000-05-29 10:56:13
Message-ID: 0005291635420M.06045@dyp (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello all,

today I've started to change the structure of one of my databases and
removed everything from it. Created new tables, come through database with
vacuumlo, say vacuum; vacuum analyze; I expected that I will have quite small
disk space occupied after this... And the result was a surprise...

Indices became VERY large even when table is empty!!!
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres        0 May 29 14:25 inbox
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres  3162112 May 29 14:25 inbox_id_key

And lots of pg_* indices are incredibly large. Like:

-rw-------   1 postgres postgres    90112 May 29 16:27 pg_attribute
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres 37920768 May 29 16:26 pg_attribute_relid_attnam_index
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres 15671296 May 29 16:26 pg_attribute_relid_attnum_index
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres    16384 May 29 16:27 pg_class
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres  4136960 May 29 16:26 pg_class_oid_index
-rw-------   1 postgres postgres 10846208 May 29 16:26 pg_class_relname_index

I know that I had quite big (>30000) amount of BLOBs.But there're only 5 of them inside now.
And this is what registered in pg_class.
Looks like bug in vacuum... Or I missed something?

BTW, Postgresql 7.0, Linux 2.2.15.

Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Olivier PRENANTDate: 2000-05-29 12:27:53
Subject: Timestamp data type problems
Previous:From: Kovacs ZoltanDate: 2000-05-29 09:19:11
Subject: Re: ODBC patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group