On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It might be worth revisiting the near identical discussions we had >> when Andreas & I integrated this stuff into the backend for 8.1. > > Good point. The previous discussions evolved to having two functions, > pg_relation_size() and pg_total_relation_size(), where pg_relation_size() is > as fine-grained as possible, allowing you to get the size of each heap, > index, toast table and toast index individually, and > pg_total_relation_size() is a convenience function to sum them all. > Following that philosophy, I think the idea of adding a new optional "fork > name" argument to pg_relation_size() is the right thing to do: > > pg_relation_size('footable') for size of the main data fork > pg_relation_size('footable', 'fsm') for FSM size Sounds reasonable. > There's currently two variants of both pg_relation_size and > pg_total_relation_size, one takes an OID and one takes a relation name as > argument. Any objections to having just one of each function, taking a > 'regclass'? The user-visible behavior wouldn't change, but I thought I'd ask > first in case I'm missing something. None here. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers