Message-ID: <4D489AD1.1010105@vmsinfo.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:44:17 -0500
From: Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
CC: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	"david@lang.hm" <david@lang.hm>,
	Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>,
	Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00@gmail.com>,
	"pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...
References: <201102012247.p11Ml6u02682@momjian.us>
	<4D48914B.4050403@dunslane.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D48914B.4050403@dunslane.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2/1/2011 6:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Whether or not it's bad application design, it's ubiquitous, and we
> should make it work as best we can, IMNSHO. This often generates
> complaints about Postgres, and if we really plan for world domination
> this needs to be part of it.

There are many other things to fix first. One of them would be optimizer 
decisions when a temp table is involved. I would also vote for wait 
event interface, tracing and hints, much rather than speeding up 
count(*). World domination will not be achieved by speeding up count(*), 
it will be achieved by providing overall performance akin to what the 
player who has already achieved the world domination. I believe that the 
company is called "Oracle Corp." or something like that?

-- 

Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions