Re: db size and tables size difference - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: db size and tables size difference
Date
Msg-id 11836.1253675229@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to db size and tables size difference  (Isabella Ghiurea <isabella.ghiurea@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>)
Responses Re: db size and tables size difference  (Naomi Walker <nwalker@eldocomp.com>)
Re: db size and tables size difference  (Isabella Ghiurea <isabella.ghiurea@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>)
List pgsql-admin
Isabella Ghiurea <isabella.ghiurea@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> writes:
> I'm trying to understand why  there are  GB's difference  when checking
> for db size using pg_size_pretty()  and  querying for  tables + indexes
> size. .

You are not counting everything --- the total DB size is clearly 12GB,
so the question is where are the other 5.5GB?  Your first query shows
that schema caom accounts for 6+GB, but the second one does not prove
that schema caom contains all the big hogs.  My guesses are:

1. Toast tables for tables that aren't in caom --- you used
pg_relation_size not pg_total_relation_size, and excluded toast
tables, so you are missing those.

2. pg_largeobject ... got any large objects?

3. Bloat in other system catalogs.  5GB of catalog bloat would be
pretty awful, but maybe that's what it is.

Try that last query without the namespace restrictions.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: could not open relation with OID 2610
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: db size and tables size difference