Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date
Msg-id 14286.1132849528@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Responses Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (  (Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>)
List pgsql-performance
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> Last I heard the reason count(*) was so expensive was because its state
> variable was a bigint. That means it doesn't fit in a Datum and has to be
> alloced and stored as a pointer. And because of the Aggregate API that means
> it has to be allocated and freed for every tuple processed.

There's a hack in 8.1 to avoid the palloc overhead (courtesy of Neil
Conway IIRC).

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (