Re: Good News re count(*) in 8.1

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at  9:52 pm, in message
<87irr6zq7j.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Greg Stark <gsstark@xxxxxxx> wrote:


> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> There have been several times that I have run a SELECT COUNT(*) on
an entire
>> table on all central machines. On identical hardware, with identical
data,
>> and equivalent query loads, the PostgreSQL databases have responded
with a
>> count in 50% to 70% of the time of the commercial product, in spite
of the
>> fact that the commercial product does a scan of a non- clustered
index while
>> PostgreSQL scans the data pages.
> 
> I take it these are fairly narrow rows? The big benefit of index-
only scans
> come in when you're scanning extremely wide tables, often counting
rows
> matching some indexed criteria.

I'm not sure what you would consider "fairly narrow rows" -- so see the
attached.  This is the VACUUM ANALYZE VERBOSE output for the largest
table, from last night's regular maintenance run.

-Kevin


Attachment: CaseHist-vacuum-analyze.txt
Description: Binary data


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux