Re: how postgresql request the computer resources

Richard Huxton wrote:
>> WITH ANY OF THIS QUERIES MSSQL TAKES NOT MUCH OF 7 SECONDS....
>
>
> In which case they make a bad choice for showing PostgreSQL is faster
> than MSSQL. Is this the only query you have, or are others giving you
> problems too?
>
> I think count(*) is about the weakest point in PG, but I don't think
> there'll be a general solution available soon. As I'm sure someone has
> mentioned, whatever else, PG needs to check the row for its visibility
> information.
>
> From the start of your email, you seem to suspect your configuration
> needs some work. Once you are happy that your settings in general are
> good, you can override some by issuing set statements before your query.
> For example:
> SET work_mem = 10000;
> might well improve example #2 where you had a hash.
>
> --
> Richard Huxton
> Archonet Ltd

Someone had suggested keeping a vector table with +1 and -1 for row
insertion and deletion and then running a cron to sum the vectors and
update a table so that you could select from that table to get the row
count. Perhaps some sort of SUM() on a column function.

Since this seems like a reasonable approach (or perhaps there may be yet
another better mechanism), cannot someone add this sort of functionality
to Postgresql to do behind the scenes?

-Mike