Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
Дата
Msg-id 20927.1105923696@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
Ответы Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)  (Jochem van Dieten <jochemd@gmail.com>)
Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
Список pgsql-hackers
"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> writes:
> Wouldn't the original proposal that had a state machine handle this?
> IIRC the original idea was:

> new tuple -> known good -> possibly dead -> known dead

Only if you disallow the transition from possibly dead back to known
good, which strikes me as a rather large disadvantage.  Failed UPDATEs
aren't so uncommon that it's okay to have one permanently disable the
optimization.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Jim C. Nasby"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
Следующее
От: Jochem van Dieten
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)