Re: Seqscan rather than Index

От: Frank Wiles
Тема: Re: Seqscan rather than Index
Дата: ,
Msg-id: 20041220134059.215cf049.frank@wiles.org
(см: обсуждение, исходный текст)
Ответ на: Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Tom Lane)
Список: pgsql-performance

Скрыть дерево обсуждения

Seqscan rather than Index  (Jon Anderson, )
 Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Tom Lane, )
 Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (David Brown, )
  Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Richard Huxton, )
   Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Greg Stark, )
    Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Tom Lane, )
     Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Greg Stark, )
      Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Tom Lane, )
    Re: Seqscan rather than Index  ("Steinar H. Gunderson", )
     Re: Seqscan rather than Index  ("Steinar H. Gunderson", )
      Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Frank Wiles, )
       Re: Seqscan rather than Index  ("Steinar H. Gunderson", )
       Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Tom Lane, )
        Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Frank Wiles, )
     Re: Seqscan rather than Index  (Bruno Wolff III, )
      Re: Seqscan rather than Index  ("Steinar H. Gunderson", )

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:37:37 -0500
Tom Lane <> wrote:

> Frank Wiles <> writes:
> >   I've also seen a huge difference between select count(*) and
> >   select count(1) in older versions,
>
> That must have been before my time, ie, pre-6.4 or so.  There is
> certainly zero difference now.

  Yeah now that I think about it that sounds about the right time
  frame I last benchmarked it.

 ---------------------------------
   Frank Wiles <>
   http://www.wiles.org
 ---------------------------------



В списке pgsql-performance по дате сообщения:

От: Alexander Borkowski
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PG Logging is Slow
От: kondo_yo@itg.hitachi.co.jp
Дата:
Сообщение: Question of performance of version 8