Because Oracle documentation says that count(1) has better performance than
count(*).
I do not know why is it so. WIll it make clear some guru on this list?
JP
On Tuesday 11 February 2003 18:59, you wrote:
> Why use count(1) instead of count(*)? They all does the same thing.
> So does count(primary key).
>
> Richard Ji
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 12:09 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
>
> Hi,
> 1. create unique index or primary key AND update statistics of the
> table
> 2. use count(1) instead of count(*)
>
> JP
>
> On Tuesday 11 February 2003 17:19, you wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I issue a select count(*) from mytable and last 30 seconds.
> >
> > The table has 1,466,196 records and were loaded with a batch process, so
> > they are in a countinous space.
> >
> > I consider that time exagerated.
> >
> > The TBS is LMT with a Uniform size of 128 MB.
> >
> > The block size is 8MB, version 9.2.0.1.0 in Windows 2000.
> >
> > Where should I start looking ???
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Ramon E. Estevez
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 809-565-3121
--
Pruner Jan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jan.pruner.cz/
-----------------------------
Only Robinson Crusoe had all his work done by Friday
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Jan Pruner
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
