Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS
Date
Msg-id 200701081809.l08I9G024520@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS  ("Craig A. James" <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Craig A. James wrote:
> Postgres functions like count() and max() are "plug ins" which has huge
> architectural advantages.  But in pre-8.1 releases, there was a big
> speed penalty for this: functions like count() were very, very slow,
> requiring a full table scan.  I think this is vastly improved from 8.0x
> to 8.1 and forward; others might be able to comment whether count() is
> now as fast in Postgres as Oracle.  The "idiom" to replace count() was

                             ^^^^^^

BigDBMS == Oracle.  ;-)

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Luke Lonergan"
Date:
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
Next
From: "Dave Dutcher"
Date:
Subject: Re: Slow Query on Postgres 8.2