Re: *sigh*

"markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz (Mark Kirkwood)" wrote in
comp.databases.postgresql.hackers:

[sNip]
> How about:
>
> Implement a function "estimated_count" that can be used instead of
> "count". It could use something like the algorithm in
> src/backend/commands/analyze.c to get a reasonably accurate psuedo count
> quickly.
>
> The advantage of this approach is that "count" still means (exact)count
> (for your xact snapshot anyway). Then the situation becomes:
>
> Want a fast count? - use estimated_count(*)
> Want an exact count - use count(*)

I think this is an excellent solution.

--
Randolf Richardson - rr(at)8x(dot)ca
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Please do not eMail me directly when responding
to my postings in the newsgroups.