Re: pg_freespacemap question

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_freespacemap question
Date: 2006-03-07 15:37:44
Message-ID: 20060308.003744.74146896.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 7. März 2006 15:09 schrieb Tatsuo Ishii:
> > > test=# select * from pg_freespacemap where blockfreebytes = 0;
> > > blockid | relfilenode | reltablespace | reldatabase | relblocknumber | blockfreebytes
> > > ---------+-------------+---------------+-------------+----------------+----------------
> > > 25 | 2619 | 1663 | 16403 | 0 | 0
> > > 63 | 2619 | 1663 | 16384 | 10 | 0
> > > (2 rows)
> >
> > I've never heard of this thing before but is this column order supposed to make sense?
>
> I have another question -- why is the view showing relfilenode and
> reltablespace? I imagine it should be showing the relation Oid instead.

I guess that's because FSM keeps those info, not relation oid.

> And what is this "blockid" thing?

from README.pg_freespacemap:

blockid | | Id, 1.. max_fsm_pages

BTW, I found the answer to my question myself by reading the source
code: if that's an index, then blockfreebytes is explicitly set to 0.
I suggest that this should be noted in the README and in this case
blockfreebytes is better to set to NULL, rather than 0.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-07 15:44:49 Re: pg_freespacemap question
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-07 15:02:34 Re: Fw: Problemas with gram.y

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-07 15:44:49 Re: pg_freespacemap question
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2006-03-07 14:57:12 Re: CREATE SYNONYM ...