| From: | Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anil Menon <gakmenon(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance question |
| Date: | 2014-11-19 18:21:00 |
| Message-ID: | CA+bJJbwzmxM4o6NN9i7TiY1P+c4Gz3KaE9iHLvMLs5TL1pRFGQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi Anil:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Anil Menon <gakmenon(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Cons : It seems doing a count(*) is not the best option for PG
>
For this and some of the following options, if you are going to just test
for existence, I would consider adding a limit 1 somewehere on the query,
to let the optimizer know you only need one and it will abort the scan on
first hit. Probabley not needed if you are going to give a query which uses
an unique index, but it shouldn't hurt.
Francisco Olarte.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2014-11-19 19:46:58 | Re: Performance question |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2014-11-19 17:31:50 | Re: [general] Error while decrypting using pgp |