On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Bernd Helmle <maili...@oopsware.de> wrote: > --On 28. März 2011 13:38:23 +0100 Bernd Helmle <maili...@oopsware.de> wrote: >>> But I think we can just call pg_table_size() regardless in 9.0+; I >>> believe it'll return the same results as pg_relation_size() on >>> non-tables. Anyone see a problem with that? >> >> Hmm yeah, seems i was thinking too complicated...here is a cleaned up >> version >> of this idea. > > Do we consider this for 9.1 or should I add this to the CF-Next for 9.2?
Since there were quite a few votes for doing this in 9.1, no dissenting votes, and it's a very small change, I went ahead and committed it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
