|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-03-22 21:36:32
|
Bugs item #1456453, was opened at 2006-03-22 16:36 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=540672&aid=1456453&group_id=74338 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: General Group: SQLObject release (specify) Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Andrew Barilla (abarilla) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: count(1) is more effecient than count(*) Initial Comment: Instead of COUNT(*), COUNT(1) is more effecient. I'm not sure if this is compatible with all of the DBMSes but I know it works with MSSQL and Postgresql. This is because the database engine/server does not need to pull back all of the database fields. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=540672&aid=1456453&group_id=74338 |
