Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: stange(at)rentec(dot)com, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Joshua Marsh <icub3d(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date: 2005-11-24 09:24:35
Message-ID: 438586D3.9010701@paradise.net.nz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Luke Lonergan wrote:

> That says it's something else in the path.  As you probably know there is a
> page lock taken, a copy of the tuple from the page, lock removed, count
> incremented for every iteration of the agg node on a count(*).  Is the same
> true of a count(1)?
> 

Sorry Luke - message 3 - I seem to be suffering from a very small 
working memory buffer myself right now, I think it's after a day of 
working with DB2 ... :-)

Anyway, as I read src/backend/parser/gram.y:6542 - count(*) is 
transformed into count(1), so these two are identical.

Cheers (last time tonight, promise!)

Mark

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2005-11-24 09:26:44
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Previous:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2005-11-24 09:22:03
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group