Re: count(*) performance improvement ideas

Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc> writes:
> Fine - once per transaction instead of once per insert. Still, if there 
> is overhead to this (updating a secondary summary table), does it really 
> make sense to have it for every table?

We certainly wouldn't accept a patch that imposed this overhead on every
table.

One of the advantages of framing it as an explicit set of triggers is
that then you have a natural way of indicating which table(s) you want
the feature for (and are willing to pay the overhead to get it).
        regards, tom lane