Re: counting rows

Tony Rogerson wrote:
> Number 2 will be best because you are effectively storing the aggregate
> instead of the server having to count the number of rows in the table which
> would require IO.

That is wildly simplistic. Based on that advice, it would be "best" to always store the count, sum, min, max, avg, etc. of everything in its parent table(s). Please tell me you don't!? Received on Sat Apr 01 2006 - 13:37:33 CEST