Re: [HACKERS] Much Ado About COUNT(*)
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87y8evtl2q.fsf@stark.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Much Ado About COUNT(*) ("Frank D. Engel, Jr." <fde101@fjrhome.net>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
"Frank D. Engel, Jr." <fde101@fjrhome.net> writes: > Yep, that could cause problems. Okay, now I'm joining the program. > > The only thing I can see that would fix this > ... There are well understood mechanisms to fix this. It's a "SMOP" or "simple matter of programming". What you would do is insert into a summary table a record that indicates how many records you've inserted into the master table. Periodically you have some daemon collect up those records and replace them with a single record. But this can be done already by hand and it's not clear having the database do it automatically is necessarily a good idea. It would impose a cost on every insert when most of the time it wouldn't be useful. Moreover this is just a special case of a general problem called "materialized views". If it were added to the database it would probably be more worthwhile implementing a more general feature that could handle other aggregate functions besides count(*) as well as other types of queries besides simple unqualified aggregates. -- greg
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: