Re: How Postgresql Compares For Query And Load Operations
От | Mitch Vincent |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How Postgresql Compares For Query And Load Operations |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 001a01c11225$0e4cd210$0200000a@Mitch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | How Postgresql Compares For Query And Load Operations (Mark kirkwood <markir@slingshot.co.nz>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
> count() is just a plain int4 counter. Obviously it could overflow with > more than 2^31 rows, but we haven't yet had many (any?) complaints about > that, so I'm not in a big hurry to change it. I haven't run into it and haven't heard anything from anyone that has but was curious just the same... I figured that count() was using an integer but I suppose if someone had the number of rows required to overflow it they'd be in the overflowing OID situation too and a dysfunctional count() would probably be the least of their worries... > OTOH, if we decide it's OK for sum(int4) to work better on machines with > int8 support than on those without, maybe it'd make sense to change > count() to use int8 too. Sure.. > > I wonder how many PG users this would affect..... Any idea? > > A fairly small minority, I'm sure; but as usual, there's no way to know > just how many... I figured that it would be a tiny number of people.. IMHO we should do it because as the great Spock once said "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.." Thanks! -Mitch
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: