| From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: **SPAM** Faster count(*)? |
| Date: | 2005-08-10 10:50:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20050810105059.GA5448@phlogiston.dyndns.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:49:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Current best practice is to run the explain and parse out the "rows"
> figure using a perl (or axe-of-choice) regexp, though we could be
> persuaded to supply a simpler API if there's enough demand for it.
FWIW, this was another one of those things I must have heard a dozen
times at OSCON. I suspect the simpler API would be popular,
particularly since post-8.0 the estimates are more reliable than they
used to be.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness.
--George Orwell
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-08-10 13:31:57 | Re: **SPAM** Faster count(*)? |
| Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-08-10 03:29:13 | Re: **SPAM** Faster count(*)? |