Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Mladen Gogala
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...
Дата
Msg-id 4D489AD1.1010105@vmsinfo.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...  (Samuel Gendler <sgendler@ideasculptor.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
On 2/1/2011 6:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Whether or not it's bad application design, it's ubiquitous, and we
> should make it work as best we can, IMNSHO. This often generates
> complaints about Postgres, and if we really plan for world domination
> this needs to be part of it.

There are many other things to fix first. One of them would be optimizer
decisions when a temp table is involved. I would also vote for wait
event interface, tracing and hints, much rather than speeding up
count(*). World domination will not be achieved by speeding up count(*),
it will be achieved by providing overall performance akin to what the
player who has already achieved the world domination. I believe that the
company is called "Oracle Corp." or something like that?

--

Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions




В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Mark Kirkwood
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bloat issue on 8.3; autovac ignores HOT new pages?
Следующее
От: Mark Kirkwood
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Any experience using "shake" defragmenter?