Re: Add visibility map information to pg_freespace.

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: "Satoshi Nagayasu / Uptime Technologies, LLC(dot)" <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add visibility map information to pg_freespace.
Date: 2013-06-26 08:20:48
Message-ID: CA+U5nM+e6-hRatoDOmaaRvz_FVV-j14=6F_Pv-zQ9X1_B5B8oA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 26 June 2013 09:09, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>wrote:

> - How about pageinspect?
>
> I proposed a simple representation format as a basis for
> discussion. Nevertheless, the VM pages has no more structure
> than a simple bit string. Given the VM info in pg_freespacemap,
> I've come in doubt of the necessity of vm_page_contnets() for
> the reason besides the orthogonality in the this extension's
> interface (which paid no attention before:-).
>

I don't think that will be needed, now I understand.

> - How about pgstattuple?
>
> It could even be said to be meaningful to add the number of
> not-all-visible pages or the ratio of it in the total pages..
>
> | postgres=# select * from pgstattuple('t');
> | -[ RECORD 1 ]----------------+---------
> | table_len | 88711168
> | tuple_count | 600001
> | tuple_len | 26400044
> | tuple_percent | 29.76
> | dead_tuple_count | 399999
> | dead_tuple_len | 17599956
> | dead_tuple_percent | 19.84
> | free_space | 33607960
> | free_percent | 37.88
> + not_all_visible_page_percent | 23.54
>
> # This column name looks too long, though.
>

Yes, please.

But name should be all_visible_percent.
Anybody that wants not_all_visible_percent can do the math.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2013-06-26 08:21:33 Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]
Previous Message Yuri Levinsky 2013-06-26 08:17:05 Re: Hash partitioning.