Steve Crawford wrote:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
I still have to investigate if the tables are getting really
larger... but at a first guess there shouldn't be any good reason to
see tables getting so large so fast... so I was wondering if
anything could contribute to make a backup much larger than it was
other than table containing more records?
The only thing that should have been really changed is the number of
concurrent connections during a backup.
Can we assume that by backup you mean pg_dump/pg_dumpall? If so, then
the change is likely due to increasing data in the database. I have a
daily report that emails me a crude but useful estimate of table
utilization based on this query:
select
relname as table,
to_char(8*relpages, '999,999,999') as "size (kB)",
(100.0*relpages/(select sum(relpages) from pg_class where
relkind='r'))::numeric(4,1) as percent
from
pg_class
where
relkind = 'r'
order by
relpages desc
limit 20;
The better way to do this would likely be to use the pg_*_size functions
detailed here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-ADMIN-DBSIZE
In particular pg_total_relation_size() , |pg_size_pretty|(), and the
like... Seems much more straightforward than the queries mentioned above..
--
Chander Ganesan
Open Technology Group, Inc.
One Copley Parkway, Suite 210
Morrisville, NC 27560
919-463-0999/877-258-8987
http://www.otg-nc.com
Ask me about expert PostgreSQL training, delivered worldwide!
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
