| From: | Volkan YAZICI <yazicivo(at)ttnet(dot)net(dot)tr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: estimated_count() implementation |
| Date: | 2006-10-22 09:07:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20061022090734.GB1374@alamut |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct 21 05:09, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> I hadn't noticed the TODO item but about a year ago I posted a
> cursor_plan_rows() function and asked for comments.
Ah! I didn't see this.
> The only reply was from Tom, who said, "Given how far off it
> frequently is, I can't believe that any of the people who ask for the
> feature would find this a satisfactory answer :-("
AFAIU, cursor_plan_rows() has some serious limitations like requiring to
be executed for a portal. I was planning to make estimated_count() work
for nodeAgg and custom calls too - as count() does.
But OTOH, Tom's complaints look like still applicable for my
estimated_count() too. Does this TODO need a little bit more
clarification or we can count is a redundant one?
Regards.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-10-22 09:18:32 | Re: Updates for vcbuild |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2006-10-22 06:30:18 | pg_buffercache tidyup |