count(*) and bad design was: Experiences with extensibility

From: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: count(*) and bad design was: Experiences with extensibility
Date: 2008-01-09 09:29:35
Message-ID: 20080109102935.6010ec20@webthatworks.it
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:06:45 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> Granted there are scenarios where others are FASTER (SELECT
> COUNT(*)) but I find that if you are doing those items, you
> normally have a weird design anyway.

> Sincerely,

Sincerely, would you make an example of such a bad design?

Or did you just mean that count(*) is bad design in postgresql since
there are usually better alternatives in postgresql?

I'm not joking. I'd like to learn.

--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Evgeny Shepelyuk 2008-01-09 09:36:29
Previous Message Rayudu Madhava 2008-01-09 09:24:34 PgSql Mirroring/Fail Over Server