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

Re: docs update for count(*) and index-only scans

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>
Cc: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: docs update for count(*) and index-only scans
Date: 2012-01-27 17:43:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 05:14, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Maybe just tweak
>> "will be executed" to "will often be executed", or change "using a
>> sequential scan of the entire table." to "using a sequential scan of
>> the table, or an index-only scan of one of its indexes".
> I don't think we need to specify what the planner does at all. How
> about simply "will need to access all rows [in the table]"
> Also +1 for removing references to "other SQL databases".

I just modified this so that it's not outright wrong any more.  I
think it's still more pessimistic than is warranted, but I wasn't sure
exactly how to rephrase it.

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Thiago Braga NobreDate: 2012-01-29 10:12:24
Subject: Re: Bug
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-01-27 17:30:08
Subject: Re: Bug

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group