From: | "Mitch Vincent" <mitch(at)venux(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [SQL] count() question |
Date: | 1999-12-19 17:33:40 |
Message-ID: | 012301bf4a47$30f59ec0$0300000a@doot.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
> Why do you want to avoid that? If you need two different results then you
> probably have to use two different queries.
Speed, resource consumption and there might not be any need for it :-)
>I assume you need the count to
> display something like "x matches found" and use LIMIT/OFFSET to step
> through them page by page.
I do use LIMIT / OFFSET and that's part of the problem. I can't get a total
count from a query when I use LIMIT and OFFSET (at least I don't know how)..
> In that case there is really no way but to
> query twice. If your query is really complicated and slow you might want
> to put the complete query results in a temporary table, and select the
> count and the to-be-displayed data from there.
Indeed, that might be a better way to structure the search however at this
point I have to work withion what is already there (there is a huge
application built around the search engine). I am going to totally re-write
this but can't do that now, now I needed to add some functionality with a
minimum impact on the rest of the application.
If I have to do another query, so be it. I just wanted to make sure there
wasn't a way for me to do something like :
select * from applicants as a, count(*) as total where a.status = 'A' limit
10 offset 0
Of course I know I can't do that like that but thought there might be a
substitute or alternative way of getting the count from within the query.
-Mitch
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 1999-12-19 18:15:48 | Re: [SQL] count() question |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-12-19 16:54:55 | Re: [SQL] group by / having |