Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Neil Conway wrote: > >> In general, I don't think this is worth doing. > > > It is possible it isn't worth doing. Can the INSERT/DELETE > > incrementing/decrementing the cached count work reliabily? > > I don't even see how the notion of a single cached value makes > theoretical sense, when in principle every transaction may have > a different idea of the correct answer. > > You could doubtless maintain a fairly good approximate total this > way, and that would be highly useful for some applications ... > but it isn't COUNT(*).
With MVCC allowing multiple rows with only one visible, I thought the INSERT/DELETE system would work --- once the delete becomes visible, the change becomes visible. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
