| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
| Date: | 2005-01-12 18:24:26 |
| Message-ID: | 29927.1105554266@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-announce pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Jonah H. Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom, Bruce, and others involved in this recurring TODO discussion
> First, let me start by saying that I understand this has been discussed
> many times before; however, Id like to see what the current state of
> affairs is regarding the possibility of using a unique index scan to
> speed up the COUNT aggregate.
It's not happening, because no one has come up with a workable proposal.
In particular, we're not willing to slow down every other operation in
order to make COUNT-*-with-no-WHERE-clause faster.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Reinhard Max | 2005-01-12 18:36:52 | segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port) |
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2005-01-12 17:42:56 | Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Reinhard Max | 2005-01-12 18:36:52 | segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port) |
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2005-01-12 17:42:56 | Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Reinhard Max | 2005-01-12 18:36:52 | segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port) |
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2005-01-12 17:42:56 | Much Ado About COUNT(*) |