Re: count(*) of zero rows returns 1

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>
Cc: Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: count(*) of zero rows returns 1
Date: 2013-01-21 19:33:35
Message-ID: 9292.1358796815@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> writes:
> Interestingly, PostgreSQL 9.2 has regressed here. Not sure if we care,
> but worth mentioning:

Regressed? The output looks the same to me as it has for some time.

> test=# select * from foo1;
> (No rows)
> Time: 1012.567 ms

How did you get that? I don't believe it's possible in the default
output format.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-01-21 19:39:20 Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2013-01-21 19:09:57 Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)