From: | "Joel Burton" <joel(at)joelburton(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Peter Darley" <pdarley(at)kinesis-cem(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Pgsql-General" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Count(*) Question |
Date: | 2002-05-01 16:40:56 |
Message-ID: | JGEPJNMCKODMDHGOBKDNGEFBCMAA.joel@joelburton.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > I was reading through the Rules section of the online docs,
> and noticed the
> > following note: (* is just an abbreviation for all the
> attribute names of a
> > relation. It is expanded by the parser into the individual
> attributes, so
> > the rule system never sees it.)
> > Does this mean that count(*) may return less than the total
> number of
> > records if all the fields in a record are NULL?
>
> Yes, I beleive so.
>
> > If this is true, is there a better way to get a count of records?
>
> I think count(1) is the common suggestion.
Interesting. In 7.3devel, it does not fail to count the completely-null rows
in count(*). Does it actually do this for any version?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Snyder | 2002-05-01 17:12:35 | Re: [GENERAL] Fwd: Postfix Relay Hub SMTP server: errors from pos |
Previous Message | Peter Darley | 2002-05-01 16:02:24 | Re: What popular, large commercial websites run PostgreSQL? |