On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Christopher Browne wrote:
> I can't imagine why the raw number of tuples in a relation would be
> expected to necessarily be terribly useful.
We use stuff like that for reporting queries.
On our message boards each post is a row. The powers that be like to know
how many posts there are total (In addition to 'today')-
select count(*) from posts is how it has been
done on our informix db. With our port to PG I instead select reltuples
I know when I login to a new db (or unknown to me db) the first thing I do
is look at tables and see what sort of data there is.. but in code I'd
rarely do that.
I know some monitoring things around here also do a select count(*) on
sometable to ensure it is growing, but like you said, this is easily done
with the number of pages as well.
yes. Informix caches this data. I believe Oracle does too.
Mysql with InnoDB does the same thing PG does. (MyISAM caches it)
Jeff Trout <jeff(at)jefftrout(dot)com>
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Stef||Date: 2003-10-03 14:30:40|
|Subject: Postgres low end processing.|
|Previous:||From: Christopher Browne||Date: 2003-10-03 11:37:07|
|Subject: Re: count(*) slow on large tables|
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: achill||Date: 2003-10-03 12:56:07|
|Subject: HeapTuple->t_tableOid==0 after SPI_exec|
|Previous:||From: Max Jacob||Date: 2003-10-03 11:51:59|
|Subject: calling functions through a "pointer"|