"Frank D. Engel, Jr." <fde101@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
