On Thu, 2019-09-19 at 12:09 +0200, Thomas Kellerer wrote: > https://blog.jooq.org/2019/09/19/whats-faster-count-or-count1/ > > Is there a reason why count(*) seems to be faster? "count(*)" is just the SQL standard's way of saying what you'd normally call "count()", that is, an aggregate without arguments. "count(1)" has to check if 1 IS NULL for each row, because NULL values are not counted. "count(*)" doesn't have to do that. Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
