关于count(1) 和 count(*)
Q:What is the difference between count(1) and count(*) in a sql query
eg.
select count(1) from emp;
and
select count(*) from emp;
A:nothing, they are the same, incur the same amount of work -- do the same thing, take the
same amount of resources.
You can see this via:
ops$tkyte@ORA817.US.ORACLE.COM> alter session set sql_trace=true;
Session altered.
ops$tkyte@ORA817.US.ORACLE.COM> select count(*) from all_objects;
COUNT(*)
----------
27044
ops$tkyte@ORA817.US.ORACLE.COM> select count(1) from all_objects
2 /
COUNT(1)
----------
27044
and the tkprof will show:
select count(*)
from
all_objects
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Parse 1 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 2 5.56 5.56 0 234998 4 1
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
total 4 5.58 5.58 0 234998 4 1
select count(1)
from
all_objects
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Parse 1 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 2 5.46 5.47 0 234998 4 1
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
total 4 5.48 5.49 0 234998 4 1
Same number of blocks read/written/processed, same cpu times (basically) same elapsed
times (basically).
they are identical.
Anyone who thinks different (and I know you are out there) will have to post a test case
like the above or some scientific proof otherwise to be taken seriously....
And just before anyone jumps on the "count(primary key) is better" bandwagon, they should take a
look at the example on
http://www.oracledba.co.uk/tips/count_speed.htm
which shows (as Tom points out) that they all work the same nowadays...
Hi, tom:
Here is my test result, it show count(*) is much fast than count(1).
In other condition ( for example, a query with join), sometime i can find count(1) is fast than
count(*), but i can't find the sample at present. When i find one, i will send to you.
SVRMGR> connect scott/tiger
Connected.
SVRMGR>
SVRMGR> drop sequence seq_r1000;
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> drop table r1000;
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> create sequence seq_r1000;
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> create table r1000 (id number);
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> insert into r1000 select seq2.nextval from all_objects where rownum<1001
;
1000 rows processed.
SVRMGR> commit;
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> set timing on
Timing ON
SVRMGR> select count(*) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(*)
----------
1000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.00 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 0.43 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 0.43 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(1) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(1)
----------
1000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.00 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 0.70 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 0.70 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(*) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(*)
----------
1000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.00 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 0.41 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 0.41 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(1) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(1)
----------
1000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.01 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 0.69 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 0.70 0.00
SVRMGR>
Followup August 31, 2001 - 7am UTC:
I'll have to guess, since you don't say, that you are using 7.x and before when count(*) and
count(1) were different (and count(1) was slower). In all releases of the databases for the last
4-5 years, they are the same.
My testing on 8.x with this test case:
drop sequence seq_r1000;
drop table r1000;
create sequence seq_r1000;
create table r1000 (id number);
insert into r1000 select seq_r1000.nextval from all_objects where rownum<1001;
analyze table r1000 compute statistics;
select count(*) from r1000, r1000;
select count(1) from r1000, r1000;
alter session set sql_trace=true;
declare
n number;
begin
for i in 1 .. 10
loop
select count(*) into n from r1000, r1000;
select count(1) into n from r1000, r1000;
end loop;
end;
/
shows:
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM
R1000,R1000
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 10 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 10 12.46 12.53 0 40 80 10
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
total 21 12.46 12.53 0 40 80 10
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 29 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
------- ---------------------------------------------------
10 SORT AGGREGATE
10000000 MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN
10010 TABLE ACCESS FULL R1000
10000000 SORT JOIN
10000 TABLE ACCESS FULL R1000
********************************************************************************
SELECT COUNT(1)
FROM
R1000,R1000
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Parse 1 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Execute 10 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Fetch 10 12.38 12.38 0 40 80 10
------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
total 21 12.38 12.40 0 40 80 10
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 29 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
------- ---------------------------------------------------
10 SORT AGGREGATE
10000000 MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN
10010 TABLE ACCESS FULL R1000
10000000 SORT JOIN
10000 TABLE ACCESS FULL R1000
they are in effect the same...
TOM WE ALREADY HAVE LOT'S OF DISCUSSION ABOUNT COUNT(*)
ETC.
LET'S JUST NOT WASTE TIME ANYMORE ON THIS TOPIC
I forget to say my database version in last post, it's Oracle 8.1.5 EE on Win NT 4.0.
And I have test it on 8.1.7 just now, the result is:
===========================
C:\>svrmgrl
Oracle Server Manager Release 3.1.7.0.0 - Production
Copyright (c) 1997, 1999, Oracle Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Oracle8i Enterprise Edition Release 8.1.7.0.0 - Production
With the Partitioning option
JServer Release 8.1.7.0.0 - Production
SVRMGR> connect scott/tiger
Connected.
SVRMGR> insert into r1000 select seq_r1000.nextval from all_objects where rownum<1001;
1000 rows processed.
SVRMGR> commit;
Statement processed.
SVRMGR> set timing on
Timing ON
SVRMGR> select count(*) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(*)
----------
4000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.00 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 1.33 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 1.33 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(1) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(1)
----------
4000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.02 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 2.36 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 2.38 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(*) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(*)
----------
4000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.01 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 1.34 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 1.35 0.00
SVRMGR> select count(1) from r1000, r1000;
COUNT(1)
----------
4000000
1 row selected.
Parse 0.00 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Execute/Fetch 2.33 (Elapsed) 0.00 (CPU)
Total 2.33 0.00
SVRMGR>
============================
If the result is caused by some problem of my environment, what problem is it?
Some extra info:
1. There is no need in a separate "count" function as
select sum(1) from emp
does the job (and could do more;).
2. "count" as an abbreviation for sum(1) doesn't really need an argument, for example
select count(1) from emp
and
select count(2) from emp
return the same data.
In short, "count" having an argument is counterintuitive, at least.
关于count(1) 和 count(*)的更多相关文章
- COUNT(1)和COUNT(*)区别
项目经常用到count(1),但是和count(*)什么区别? 从下面实验结果来看,Count (*)和Count(1)查询结果是一样的,都包括对NULL的统计,而count(列名) 是不包括NULL ...
- Count(*)或者Count(1)或者Count([列]) 区别
在SQL 中Count(*)或者Count(1)或者Count([列])或许是最常用的聚合函数.很多人其实对这三者之间是区分不清的.本文会阐述这三者的作用,关系以及背后的原理. 往常我经常会看到一些所 ...
- select count(*)和select count(1)
一般情况下,Select Count (*)和Select Count(1)两着返回结果是一样的 假如表沒有主键(Primary key), 那么count(1)比count(*)快, 如果有主键的話 ...
- Oracle 中count(1) 和count(*) 的区别
count()与count(*)比较: 如果你的数据表没有主键,那么count()比count(*)快 如果有主键的话,那主键(联合主键)作为count的条件也比count(*)要快 如果你的表只有一 ...
- select count(*)和select count(1)的区别
一般情况下,Select Count (*)和Select Count(1)两着返回结果是一样的 假如表沒有主键(Primary key), 那么count(1)比count(*)快, 如果有主键的話 ...
- select count(*)和select count(1)哪个性能高
select count(*).count(数字).count(字段名)在相同的条件下是没有性能差别的,一般我们在统计行数的时候都会把NULL值统计在内的,所以这样的话,最好就是使用COUNT(*) ...
- count(*)、count(val)和count(1)的解释
一.关于count的一些谣言: 1.count(*)比count(val)更慢!项目组必须用count(val),不准用count(*),谁用扣谁钱! 2.count(*)用不到索引,count(va ...
- 【MySQL】技巧 之 count(*)、count(1)、count(col)
只看结果的话,Select Count(*) 和 Select Count(1) 两着返回结果是一样的. 假如表沒有主键(Primary key), 那么count(1)比count(*)快,如果有主 ...
- mysql中的count(primary_key)、count(1)、count(*)的区别
表结构如下: mysql> show create table user\G; *************************** 1. row ********************** ...
随机推荐
- KindEditor编辑器, 利用ajax动态切换编辑器内容
// 后台成功返回数据后的js处理 KindEditor.remove('#content_id'); // 先移除之前创建的编辑器 var editor = KindEditor.create('# ...
- Oracle启动的整个过程
1.启动选项 在发出startup命令启动数据库时,oracle将在默认位置$ORACLE_HOME/dbs(UNIX/Linux)中查找初始化参数文件.Oracle将以下面的顺序在其中寻找合适的初始 ...
- [设计模式]<<设计模式之禅>>抽象工厂模式
1 女娲的失误 上一篇讲了女娲造人的故事.人是造出来了,世界也热闹了,可是低头一看,都是清一色的类型,缺少关爱.仇恨.喜怒哀乐等情绪,人类的生命太平淡了,女娲一想,猛然一拍 脑袋,忘记给人类定义性别了 ...
- Sublime Text—安装
一.简介 市面上的编辑器纷繁复杂各有优点,好用的编辑器能让你工作事半功倍,先简单介绍下本文主角Sublime Text编辑器,下面简称Sublime. 1.可用于 Windows.Mac OS X 和 ...
- trigger,triggerhandler模拟事件
常用模拟 有时候,需要通过模拟用户操作,来达到单击的效果.例如在用户进入页面后,就触发click事件,而不需要用户去主动单击. 在JQuery中,可以使用trigger()方法完成模拟操作.例如可以使 ...
- JavaScript面试问题:事件委托和this
JavaScript不仅门槛低,而且是一门有趣.功能强大和非常重要的语言.各行各业的人发现自己最混乱的选择是JavaSscript编程语言.由 于有着各种各样的背景,所以不是每个人都对 ...
- Jersey(1.19.1) - Building Responses
Sometimes it is necessary to return additional information in response to a HTTP request. Such infor ...
- JSP连接mysql 驱动包
360网盘 https://yunpan.cn/cPxT6CV9Kydyb 访问密码 1df9
- Apache httpd开启SSL
https://my.oschina.net/xpbug/blog/197454 必要软件 apache httpd 2.4(windows) perl 5 (windows) openssl (wi ...
- Web前端开发:SQL Jsp小项目(一)
Jsp的学习算是告一段落,针对这段时间的学习,写了一个Jsp小项目来巩固学到的知识. 框架示意图 User list process UserAdd process 需要的界面效果: 需要工具:Ecl ...