Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
AskSQLTeam
Ask SQLTeam Question
0 Posts |
 Posted - 2005-02-16 : 08:18:59
|
| Roger writes "Hi,Is doing "select count(1)" more efficient than "select count(*)"?Roger" |
|
|
spirit1
Cybernetic Yak Master
11752 Posts |
Posted - 2005-02-16 : 08:29:53
|
no. exec plans are the same.Go with the flow & have fun! Else fight the flow  |
 |
|
|
Xerxes
Aged Yak Warrior
666 Posts |
Posted - 2005-02-16 : 09:54:20
|
Uh....WHY  would anyone want to select count(1)? I can't imagine what you'd use it for!Semper fi, Xerxes, USMC(Ret.)-------------------------------------------------------------------------Once a Marine Programmer Analyst ALWAYS a Marine Programmer Analyst |
|
|
|
spirit1
Cybernetic Yak Master
11752 Posts |
Posted - 2005-02-16 : 10:22:05
|
| probably because the logic would be: hmmm if i count the column then it must do scan, but if i don't count a column then it won't do a read...Go with the flow & have fun! Else fight the flow |
|
|
|
Xerxes
Aged Yak Warrior
666 Posts |
Posted - 2005-02-16 : 10:26:02
|
| --- or the logic was "less resources would be used by specifying a target count [1] rather than leaving it to be discovered by the function itself [*]".Semper fi, Xerxes, USMC(Ret.)-------------------------------------------------------------------------Once a Marine Programmer Analyst ALWAYS a Marine Programmer Analyst |
|
|
|
spirit1
Cybernetic Yak Master
11752 Posts |
Posted - 2005-02-16 : 12:15:27
|
oh yeah... how could've i forgotten that one???  Go with the flow & have fun! Else fight the flow |
|
|
|
|
|
|
select count