On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 15:38, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 15:12, Greg Stark wrote:
> > "Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe(at)qwest(dot)net> writes:
> > > Also, count(*) is likely to always generate a seq scan due to the way
> > > aggregates are implemented currently in pgsql. you might want to try:
> > Huh? I'm curious to know what you're talking about here.
> This has been discussed ad infinitum on the lists in the past. And
> explained by better minds than mine, but I'll give it a go.
> PostgreSQL has a "generic" aggregate method. Imagine instead doing a
> select count(id1+id2-id3) from table where ...
that should be avg(id1+id2-id3)... doh
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-08-29 22:03:43|
|Subject: Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index? |
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2004-08-29 21:38:00|
|Subject: Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?|