Re: [HACKERS] database size

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Darren King <darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, sthomas(at)cise(dot)ufl(dot)edu
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] database size
Date: 1998-01-07 00:32:39
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.3.96.980106203122.254f-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Darren King wrote:

> 48 bytes + each row header (on my aix box..._your_ mileage may vary)
> 8 bytes + two int fields @ 4 bytes each
> 4 bytes + pointer on page to tuple
> -------- =
> 60 bytes per tuple
>
> 8192 / 60 give 136 tuples per page.
>
> 300000 / 136 ... round up ... need 2206 pages which gives us ...
>
> 2206 * 8192 = 18,071,532
>
> So 19 MB is about right. And this is the best to be done, unless
> you can make do with int2s which would optimally shrink the table
> size to 16,834,560 bytes. Any nulls in there might add a few bytes
> per offending row too, but other than that, this should be considered
> normal postgresql behavior.

Bruce...this would be *great* to have in the FAQ!! What we do need is
a section of the User Manual dealing with computing resources required for
a table, similar to this :)

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Keith Parks 1998-01-07 00:35:20 VACUUM error on CVS build 07-JAN-98
Previous Message The Hermit Hacker 1998-01-07 00:18:19 Re: [HACKERS] database size