From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com>
Cc: david@lang.hm <david@lang.hm>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Cc: Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow count(*) again...
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:12:44 -0500
Message-ID: <5100.1296601964@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D48914B.4050403@dunslane.net>
References: <201102012247.p11Ml6u02682@momjian.us>
<4D48914B.4050403@dunslane.net>
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 02/01/2011 05:47 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> At this point what we've got is 25% of the runtime in nodeAgg.c overhead,
>>> and it's difficult to see how to get any real improvement without tackling
>>> that.
>> Do we want a TODO about optimizing COUNT(*) to avoid aggregate
>> processing overhead?
> 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.
I don't think that saving ~25% on COUNT(*) runtime will help that at all.
The people who complain about it expect it to be instantaneous.
If this sort of hack were free, I'd be all for doing it anyway; but I'm
concerned that adding tests to enable a fast path will slow down every
other aggregate, or else duplicate a lot of code that we'll then have to
maintain.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@dunslane.net, bruce@momjian.us, mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com, david@lang.hm, craig@postnewspapers.com.au, tivv00@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow count(*) again...
In-Reply-To: <5100.1296601964@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox