X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF93B53608 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 18:08:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82112-04 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 17:08:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from vms040pub.verizon.net (vms040pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.40]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82477535F0 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 18:08:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from jfradkin ([66.15.127.235]) by vms040.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 HotFix 0.04 (built Dec 24 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0IEN004090YIQIIC@vms040.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:08:43 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 13:08:44 -0400 From: "Joel Fradkin" Subject: Re: getting count for a specific querry In-reply-to: <20050408163039.GE27718@phlogiston.dyndns.org> To: "'Andrew Sullivan'" , Message-id: <000001c53c5d$9f07f0d0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.34 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200504/103 X-Sequence-Number: 20996 Thanks all. I might have to add a button to do the count on command so they don't get the hit. I would want it to return the count of the condition, not the currently displayed number of rows. Is there any other database engines that provide better performance? (We just 2 moths moving to postgres and it is not live yet, but if I am going to get results back slower then my 2 proc box running MSSQL in 2 gig and 2 processor I cant see any reason to move to it) The Postgres is on a 4 proc Dell with 8 gigs of memory. I thought I could analyze our queries and our config to optimize. Joel Fradkin