From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tyler Durden <tylersticky(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Seq Scan |
Date: | 2007-06-01 17:03:30 |
Message-ID: | 96F60F91-F3A7-4134-8DD0-E519C8941CDB@seespotcode.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:48 , Tyler Durden wrote:
> I'm having some problems in performance in a simple select count(id)
> from....
Unrestricted count() (i.e., no WHERE clause) will perform a
sequential scan. If you're looking for faster ways to store table row
count information, please search the archives, as this has been
discussed many times before.
> # explain select (id) from table_name;
> -[ RECORD
> 1 ]----------------------------------------------------------------
> QUERY PLAN | Seq Scan on table_name (cost=0.00..8601.30
> rows=266730 width=4)
The query returns the id column value for each row in the table. The
fastest way to do this is visiting every row., i.e., a sequential
scan. Using an index would require (1) looking in the index and (2)
looking up the corresponding row.
Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig James | 2007-06-01 17:57:56 | Autodetect of software RAID1+0 fails |
Previous Message | Dan Harris | 2007-06-01 16:59:01 | Re: Seq Scan |