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: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Date: 2011-10-24T20:23:27Z

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:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I wonder how trustworthy the measure of the visibilitymap_test call site
>> as a consumer of cycles really is.

> I'm not sure either.  I guess we could try short-circuiting
> visibilitymap_test and see what that does to performance (let's leave
> correct answers out of it).

That would conflate the cost of the call with the cost of the function.
Maybe you could try manually inlining the visibility test?

			regards, tom lane