Re: Performance of count(*)
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance of count(*) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b42b73150703220639x40dbac7en29318778b43e1e4c@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Performance of count(*) (Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance of count(*)
Re: Performance of count(*) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 3/22/07, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote: > I just try to find out why a simple count(*) might last that long. > At first I tried explain, which rather quickly knows how many rows > to check, but the final count is two orders of magnitude slower. You can get the approximate count by selecting reltuples from pg_class. It is valid as of last analyze. As others suggest select count(*) from table is very special case which non-mvcc databases can optimize for. There are many reasons why this is the case and why it explains nothing about the relative performance of the two databases. This is probably #1 most frequenctly asked question to -performance...there is a wealth of information in the archives. merlin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: