Re: psql \dt and table size

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql \dt and table size
Date: 2011-03-21 23:32:09
Message-ID: 20110321233209.GC27692@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

+1 for fixing this behavior in 9.1. -1 for changing in 9.0, as the
change in behavior mid-release will cause more confusion than the
incomplete accounting does.

Cheers,
David.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 06:44:51PM +0100, Bernd Helmle wrote:
> It stroke me today again, that \dt+ isn't displaying the acurate
> table size for tables, since it uses pg_relation_size() till now.
> With having pg_table_size() since PostgreSQL 9.0 available, i
> believe it would be more useful to have the total acquired storage
> displayed, including implicit objects (the mentioned case where it
> was not very useful atm was a table with a big TOAST table).
>
> Attached minor patch extends \dt to use pg_table_size() starting
> with PostgreSQL 9.0, not sure if we backport such changes though. It
> would be interesting for 9.1, however.
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Bernd

>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2011-03-21 23:36:28 Re: really lazy vacuums?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-03-21 23:06:25 Re: Chinese initdb on Windows