Thalis Kalfigkopoulos writes:
> I read somewhere that the following query gives a quick estimate of the #
> of rows in a table regardless of the table's size (which would matter in a
> simple SELECT count(*)?):
> SELECT (CASE WHEN reltuples > 0 THEN
> pg_relation_size('mytable')/(8192*relpages/re
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Lonni J Friedman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Lonni J Friedman
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > I
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Lonni J Friedman wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I read somewhere that the following query gives a quick estimate of the
>> > # of
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Lonni J Friedman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I read somewhere that the following query gives a quick estimate of the
> # of
> > rows in a table regardless of the table's size (which would matter in a
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Thalis Kalfigkopoulos
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I read somewhere that the following query gives a quick estimate of the # of
> rows in a table regardless of the table's size (which would matter in a
> simple SELECT count(*)?):
>
> SELECT (CASE WHEN reltuples > 0 THEN
> p
