Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3038475C84
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:02:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6SH2nVk011472;
	Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:02:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: Markus Bertheau <twanger@bluetwanger.de>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: performance difference in count(1) vs. count(*)? 
In-reply-to: <1027871441.7362.0.camel@saphir> 
References: <1027871441.7362.0.camel@saphir>
Comments: In-reply-to Markus Bertheau <twanger@bluetwanger.de>
	message dated "28 Jul 2002 17:50:22 +0200"
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 13:02:49 -0400
Message-ID: <11471.1027875769@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200207/426
X-Sequence-Number: 8804

Markus Bertheau <twanger@bluetwanger.de> writes:
> is there a difference performance-wise between select count(1) and
> select count(*)?

Nope.  In fact, the latter is converted to the former during parsing.

			regards, tom lane