Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table
Date
Msg-id 1a67bba7-ba43-86ee-a458-a4dc8ae2b85e@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018/11/04 4:58, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> here is a patch

Thank you, Pavel.

Here are some comments.

I mentioned it during the last review, but maybe you missed it due to the
other discussion.

+        the pattern are listed.  If the form <literal>\dP+</literal>
+        is used, a sum of size of related partitions and a description
+        are also displayed.

+        the pattern are listed.  If the form <literal>\dPi+</literal>
+        is used, a sum of size of related indexes and a description
+        are also displayed.

+        the pattern are listed.  If the form <literal>\dPt+</literal>
+        is used, a sum of size of related indexes and a description
+        are also displayed.

I suggest:

"is used, the sum of sizes of related partitions / index partitions /
table partitions and associated description are also displayed."

Note that I also fixed the typo (indexes -> tables) in the last one.

Also, I wonder if we should mention in the description of \dP+ that the
displayed size considers the sizes of both the tables and indexes on the
individual partitions, because in the code, I see pg_total_relation_size
being used.  So, the text should be something like:

"is used, the sum of size of related partitions (including the table and
indexes, if any) and associated description are also displayed."

Code itself looks to me to be in good shape, except you seem to have also
missed Michael's comment upthread:

+            /* PostgreSQL 11 has pg_partition_tree function */

/* PostgreSQL 12 has pg_partition_tree function */

Thanks again.

Regards,
Amit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: John Naylor
Date:
Subject: Re: "Writing" output lines during make
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: "Writing" output lines during make