Re: So, is COUNT(*) fast now?
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-10-21T20:05:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Remove pg_upgrade dependency on the 'postgres' database existing in the
- 51eba98cf459 9.2.0 cited
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Hmm, I guess there is a bit of a hotspot in StoreIndexTuple, which is > probably being folded into IndexOnlyNext in the per-function timings: > ExecClearTuple(slot); > for (i = 0; i < nindexatts; i++) > values[i] = index_getattr(itup, i + 1, itupdesc, &isnull[i]); > ExecStoreVirtualTuple(slot); I had wondered whether it'd be worth optimizing that along the lines of slot_getallattrs(). But most indexes probably have only one column, or anyway not enough to make for a useful savings. regards, tom lane