I saw a demonstration somewhere that they are functionally 100% equal. No performance difference. Mike
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:53 PM, choc101 <[email protected]> wrote: > As MM said they are the same, but the argument with these two > approaches is always seems to be about which one runs faster. If I > recall correctly count(*) is supposed to be faster than count(1) by > about 20% or so, but I'm not about to get into how or why. I'm sure > you could pull up some threads on ask tom that will explain this in > all the detail you need or you could use TKPROF with tracing turned on > and conduct your own test. Personally I just use count(*) as a > standard and have never found any disadvantage to this. > > On Sep 29, 2:22 am, PUNEET <[email protected]> wrote: > > What is the difference between count(*) and count(1)??? > > > > I tried to search on that but not able to get the exact difference.. > > > > Thanks > > > > Puneet > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Oracle PL/SQL" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/Oracle-PLSQL?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Oracle PL/SQL" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Oracle-PLSQL?hl=en
