Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6399FB7B4 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:58:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 92097-02 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:58:46 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from mail.net-domino.com (www.net-domino.com [74.208.11.96]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D889FB65D for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:58:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (u15245314.onlinehome-server.com [74.208.11.96]) by mail.net-domino.com (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l2MFwYS7003113 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:58:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4602B5C5.20003@mochima.com> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:58:45 -0500 From: Carlos Moreno User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance of count(*) References: <20070322111044.GC4439@andi-lap.la.revver.com> <20070322122944.GD4439@andi-lap.la.revver.com> In-Reply-To: <20070322122944.GD4439@andi-lap.la.revver.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Added-Header: Sample_milter accepted message X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200703/334 X-Sequence-Number: 23739 >>count(*). I was just discussing general performance issues on the >>phone line and when my colleague asked me about the size of the >>database he just wonderd why this takes so long for a job his >>MS-SQL server is much faster. [...]. >> >> > >Simple. MSSQL is optimized for this case, and uses "older" >datastructures. PG uses a MVCC storage, > Which version of MSSQL? Wikipedia says that SQL Server 2005 uses the MVCC model. Carlos --