简单的两步:(注意:不需要改变任何东西-只是复制粘贴) 1. 创建函数

create function 
cnt_rows(schema text, tablename text) returns integer
as
$body$
declare
  result integer;
  query varchar;
begin
  query := 'SELECT count(1) FROM ' || schema || '.' || tablename;
  execute query into result;
  return result;
end;
$body$
language plpgsql;

2. 运行此查询获取所有表的行数

select sum(cnt_rows) as total_no_of_rows from (select 
  cnt_rows(table_schema, table_name)
from information_schema.tables
where 
  table_schema not in ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema') 
  and table_type='BASE TABLE') as subq;

或 按表获取行数

select
  table_schema,
  table_name, 
  cnt_rows(table_schema, table_name)
from information_schema.tables
where 
  table_schema not in ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema') 
  and table_type='BASE TABLE'
order by 3 desc;

简单的两步:(注意:不需要改变任何东西-只是复制粘贴) 1. 创建函数

create function 
cnt_rows(schema text, tablename text) returns integer
as
$body$
declare
  result integer;
  query varchar;
begin
  query := 'SELECT count(1) FROM ' || schema || '.' || tablename;
  execute query into result;
  return result;
end;
$body$
language plpgsql;

2. 运行此查询获取所有表的行数

select sum(cnt_rows) as total_no_of_rows from (select 
  cnt_rows(table_schema, table_name)
from information_schema.tables
where 
  table_schema not in ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema') 
  and table_type='BASE TABLE') as subq;

或 按表获取行数

select
  table_schema,
  table_name, 
  cnt_rows(table_schema, table_name)
from information_schema.tables
where 
  table_schema not in ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema') 
  and table_type='BASE TABLE'
order by 3 desc;

如果您不介意可能过时的数据，您可以访问查询优化器使用的相同统计信息。

喜欢的东西:

SELECT relname, n_tup_ins - n_tup_del as rowcount FROM pg_stat_all_tables;

这对我很有效

SELECT schemaname,relname,n_live_tup FROM pg_stat_user_tables ORDER BY n_live_tup DESC;

要获得估计，请参阅格雷格·史密斯的答案。

为了得到确切的数字，到目前为止，其他答案都受到一些问题的困扰，其中一些问题很严重(见下文)。这里有一个版本，希望更好:

CREATE FUNCTION rowcount_all(schema_name text default 'public')
  RETURNS table(table_name text, cnt bigint) as
$$
declare
 table_name text;
begin
  for table_name in SELECT c.relname FROM pg_class c
    JOIN pg_namespace s ON (c.relnamespace=s.oid)
    WHERE c.relkind = 'r' AND s.nspname=schema_name
  LOOP
    RETURN QUERY EXECUTE format('select cast(%L as text),count(*) from %I.%I',
       table_name, schema_name, table_name);
  END LOOP;
end
$$ language plpgsql;

它接受模式名作为参数，如果没有给出参数，则接受public。

要使用特定的模式列表或来自查询的列表而不修改函数，可以从查询中调用它，如下所示:

WITH rc(schema_name,tbl) AS (
  select s.n,rowcount_all(s.n) from (values ('schema1'),('schema2')) as s(n)
)
SELECT schema_name,(tbl).* FROM rc;

这将生成一个包含模式、表和行计数的3列输出。

下面是这个函数避免的其他答案中的一些问题:

Table and schema names shouldn't be injected into executable SQL without being quoted, either with quote_ident or with the more modern format() function with its %I format string. Otherwise some malicious person may name their table tablename;DROP TABLE other_table which is perfectly valid as a table name. Even without the SQL injection and funny characters problems, table name may exist in variants differing by case. If a table is named ABCD and another one abcd, the SELECT count(*) FROM... must use a quoted name otherwise it will skip ABCD and count abcd twice. The %I of format does this automatically. information_schema.tables lists custom composite types in addition to tables, even when table_type is 'BASE TABLE' (!). As a consequence, we can't iterate oninformation_schema.tables, otherwise we risk having select count(*) from name_of_composite_type and that would fail. OTOH pg_class where relkind='r' should always work fine. The type of COUNT() is bigint, not int. Tables with more than 2.15 billion rows may exist (running a count(*) on them is a bad idea, though). A permanent type need not to be created for a function to return a resultset with several columns. RETURNS TABLE(definition...) is a better alternative.

有三种方法可以得到这种计数，每种方法都有各自的权衡。

If you want a true count, you have to execute the SELECT statement like the one you used against each table. This is because PostgreSQL keeps row visibility information in the row itself, not anywhere else, so any accurate count can only be relative to some transaction. You're getting a count of what that transaction sees at the point in time when it executes. You could automate this to run against every table in the database, but you probably don't need that level of accuracy or want to wait that long.

WITH tbl AS
  (SELECT table_schema,
          TABLE_NAME
   FROM information_schema.tables
   WHERE TABLE_NAME not like 'pg_%'
     AND table_schema in ('public'))
SELECT table_schema,
       TABLE_NAME,
       (xpath('/row/c/text()', query_to_xml(format('select count(*) as c from %I.%I', table_schema, TABLE_NAME), FALSE, TRUE, '')))[1]::text::int AS rows_n
FROM tbl
ORDER BY rows_n DESC;

第二种方法指出，统计信息收集器在任何时候大致跟踪有多少行是“活动的”(没有被后来的更新删除或废弃)。这个值在剧烈活动时可能会偏离一点，但通常是一个很好的估计:

SELECT schemaname,relname,n_live_tup 
  FROM pg_stat_user_tables 
ORDER BY n_live_tup DESC;

这还可以显示有多少行已死，这本身就是一个值得监视的有趣数字。

第三种方法是注意到系统ANALYZE命令，从PostgreSQL 8.3开始由autovacuum进程定期执行以更新表统计信息，它也计算行估计。你可以像这样抓取它:

SELECT 
  nspname AS schemaname,relname,reltuples
FROM pg_class C
LEFT JOIN pg_namespace N ON (N.oid = C.relnamespace)
WHERE 
  nspname NOT IN ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema') AND
  relkind='r' 
ORDER BY reltuples DESC;

很难说使用这些查询中哪一个更好。通常，我根据是否有更多有用的信息也想在pg_class中使用，还是在pg_stat_user_tables中使用来做出决定。出于基本的计数目的，只是为了了解事物的总体大小，这两种方法都应该足够准确。