Re: *sigh*

"markir@paradise.net.nz (Mark Kirkwood)" wrote in 
comp.databases.postgresql.hackers:

[sNip]
> How about:
> 
> Implement a function "estimated_count" that can be used instead of 
> "count". It could use something like the algorithm in 
> src/backend/commands/analyze.c to get a reasonably accurate psuedo count 
> quickly.
> 
> The advantage of this approach is that "count" still means (exact)count 
> (for your xact snapshot anyway). Then the situation becomes:
> 
> Want a fast count? - use estimated_count(*)
> Want an exact count - use count(*)
       I think this is an excellent solution.

-- 
Randolf Richardson - rr@8x.ca
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Please do not eMail me directly when responding
to my postings in the newsgroups.