I have the following ugly query, which runs okay but not great, on my local machine (1.4 secs, running v5.7). On the server I'm using, which is running an older version of MySQL (v5.5), the query just hangs. It seems to get caught on "Copying to tmp table":
SELECT
SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS
DISTINCT p.parcel_number,
p.street_number,
p.street_name,
p.site_address_city_state,
p.number_of_units,
p.number_of_stories,
p.bedrooms,
p.bathrooms,
p.lot_area_sqft,
p.cost_per_sq_ft,
p.year_built,
p.sales_date,
p.sales_price,
p.id
FROM (
SELECT APN, property_case_detail_id FROM property_inspection AS pi
GROUP BY APN, property_case_detail_id
HAVING
COUNT(IF(status='Resolved Date', 1, NULL)) = 0
) as open_cases
JOIN property AS p
ON p.parcel_number = open_cases.APN
LIMIT 0, 1000;
mysql> show processlist;
+-------+-------------+-----------+--------------+---------+------+----------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Id | User | Host | db | Command | Time | State | Info |
+-------+-------------+-----------+--------------+---------+------+----------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 21120 | headsupcity | localhost | lead_housing | Query | 21 | Copying to tmp table | SELECT
SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS
DISTINCT p.parcel_number,
p.street_numbe |
| 21121 | headsupcity | localhost | lead_housing | Query | 0 | NULL | show processlist |
+-------+-------------+-----------+--------------+---------+------+----------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
Explains are different on my local machine and on the server, and I'm assuming the only reason my query runs at all on my local machine, is because of the key that is automatically created on the derived table:
Explain (local):
+----+-------------+------------+------------+------+---------------+-------------+---------+------------------------------+---------+----------+---------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | partitions | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | filtered | Extra |
+----+-------------+------------+------------+------+---------------+-------------+---------+------------------------------+---------+----------+---------------------------------+
| 1 | PRIMARY | p | NULL | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 40319 | 100.00 | Using temporary |
| 1 | PRIMARY | <derived2> | NULL | ref | <auto_key0> | <auto_key0> | 8 | lead_housing.p.parcel_number | 40 | 100.00 | NULL |
| 2 | DERIVED | pi | NULL | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 1623978 | 100.00 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
+----+-------------+------------+------------+------+---------------+-------------+---------+------------------------------+---------+----------+---------------------------------+
Explain (server):
+----+-------------+------------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+------------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------+
| 1 | PRIMARY | p | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 41369 | Using temporary |
| 1 | PRIMARY | <derived2> | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 122948 | Using where; Distinct; Using join buffer |
| 2 | DERIVED | pi | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 1718586 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
+----+-------------+------------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------+
Schemas:
mysql> explain property_inspection;
+-------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| lblCaseNo | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| APN | bigint(10) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| date | varchar(50) | NO | | NULL | |
| status | varchar(500) | NO | | NULL | |
| property_case_detail_id | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | |
| case_type_id | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | |
| date_modified | timestamp | NO | | CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | on update CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
| update_status | tinyint(1) | YES | | 1 | |
| created_date | datetime | NO | | NULL | |
+-------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
10 rows in set (0.02 sec)
mysql> explain property; (not all columns, but you get the gist)
+----------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+----------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| parcel_number | bigint(10) | NO | | 0 | |
| date_modified | timestamp | NO | | CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | on update CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
| created_date | datetime | NO | | NULL | |
+----------------------------+--------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
Variables that might be relevant:
tmp_table_size: 16777216
innodb_buffer_pool_size: 8589934592
Any ideas on how to optimize this, and any idea why the explains are so different?
Since this is where the Optimizers are quite different, let's try to optimize
SELECT APN, property_case_detail_id FROM property_inspection AS pi
GROUP BY APN, property_case_detail_id
HAVING
COUNT(IF(status='Resolved Date', 1, NULL)) = 0
) as open_cases
Give this a try:
SELECT ...
FROM property AS p
WHERE NOT EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM property_inspection
WHERE status = 'Resolved Date'
AND p.parcel_number = APN )
ORDER BY ??? -- without this, the `LIMIT` is unpredictable
LIMIT 0, 1000;
or...
SELECT ...
FROM property AS p
LEFT JOIN property_inspection AS pi ON p.parcel_number = pi.APN
WHERE pi.status = 'Resolved Date'
AND pi.APN IS NULL
ORDER BY ??? -- without this, the `LIMIT` is unpredictable
LIMIT 0, 1000;
Index:
property_inspection: INDEX(status, parcel_number) -- in either order
MySQL 5.5 and 5.7 are quite different and the later has better optimizer so there is no surprise that explain plans are different.
You'd better provide SHOW CREATE TABLE property; and SHOW CREATE TABLE property_inspection; outputs as it will show indexes that are on your tables.
Your sub-query is the issue.
- Server tries to process 1.6M rows with no index and grouping everything.
- Having is quite expensive operation so you'd better avoid it, expecially in sub-queries.
- Grouping in this case is bad idea. You do not need the aggregation/counting. You need to check if the 'Resolved Date' status is just exists
Based on the information provided I'd recommend:
- Alter table property_inspection to reduce length of status column.
- Add index on the column. Use covering index (APN, property_case_detail_id, status) if possible (in this columns order).
- Change query to something like this:
SELECT
SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS
DISTINCT p.parcel_number,
...
p.id
FROM
property_inspection AS `pi1`
INNER JOIN property AS p ON (
p.parcel_number = `pi1`.APN
)
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT
`pi2`.property_case_detail_id
, `pi2`. APN
FROM
property_inspection AS `pi2`
WHERE
`status` = 'Resolved Date'
) AS exclude ON (
exclude.APN = `pi1`.APN
AND exclude.property_case_detail_id = `pi1`.property_case_detail_id
)
WHERE
exclude.APN IS NULL
LIMIT
0, 1000;
Related
I have the following query:
SELECT final_query.chr
, final_query.start
, final_query.end
, co.chr
, co.start
, co.end
, final_query.count
FROM (SELECT ed.chr
, ed.start
, ed.end
, case when e.bin1=ed.bin then e.bin2 else e.bin1 end AS target
, count
FROM (SELECT * FROM coordinates
WHERE chr="chr1" AND (start between 3960000 AND 4000000 OR end between 3960000 AND 4000000)
) ed
JOIN counts e ON (e.bin1 = ed.bin OR e.bin2=ed.bin)
SORT BY count LIMIT 1,20)
AS final_query
JOIN coordinates co ON final_query.target=co.bin;
and the output of EXPLAINED is:
+------+-------------+-------------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+------+-------------+-------------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | e | ALL | bin1,bin2 | NULL | NULL | NULL | 30763816 | Using filesort |
| 1 | SIMPLE | coordinates | ref | PRIMARY,chr | chr | 22 | const | 4929 | Using index condition; Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | co | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 22 | func | 1 | Using where |
+------+-------------+-------------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+-------+----------+------------------------------------+
What I am doing is to perform the following query of table coordinates, which has field chr indexed. So, in the subquery shown below, I filter those rows that match my conditions.
... (SELECT * FROM coordinates
WHERE chr="chr1" AND (start between 3960000 AND 4000000 OR end between 3960000 AND 4000000)
) ...
This table outputs field bin, also indexed. This field bin links with bin1 and bin2 both from table counts and indexed as well. So, here, what I want is to get all those rows in table counts having coordinates.bin in fields bin1 and bin2. Why in this step no index is used?
Besides of it, I would like to add an ORDER BY in my query, just before the LIMIT statement. But it slows too much my query. I don't know why, because it have to sort a maximum of 4000 rows...
How can I optimize my query?
My tables, from the DESCRIBE statement:
Table counts
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| bin1 | varchar(20) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| bin2 | varchar(20) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| count | float(6,2) | NO | | NULL | |
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
Table coordinates
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+
| bin | varchar(20) | NO | PRI | NULL | |
| chr | varchar(20) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| start | int(11) | NO | | NULL | |
| end | int(11) | NO | | NULL | |
+-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+
I'm trying to calculate maximum simultaneous calls. My query, which I believe to be accurate, takes way too long given ~250,000 rows. The cdrs table looks like this:
+---------------+-----------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+---------------+-----------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| id | bigint(20) unsigned | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| CallType | varchar(32) | NO | | NULL | |
| StartTime | datetime | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| StopTime | datetime | NO | | NULL | |
| CallDuration | float(10,5) | NO | | NULL | |
| BillDuration | mediumint(8) unsigned | NO | | NULL | |
| CallMinimum | tinyint(3) unsigned | NO | | NULL | |
| CallIncrement | tinyint(3) unsigned | NO | | NULL | |
| BasePrice | float(12,9) | NO | | NULL | |
| CallPrice | float(12,9) | NO | | NULL | |
| TransactionId | varchar(20) | NO | | NULL | |
| CustomerIP | varchar(15) | NO | | NULL | |
| ANI | varchar(20) | NO | | NULL | |
| ANIState | varchar(10) | NO | | NULL | |
| DNIS | varchar(20) | NO | | NULL | |
| LRN | varchar(20) | NO | | NULL | |
| DNISState | varchar(10) | NO | | NULL | |
| DNISLATA | varchar(10) | NO | | NULL | |
| DNISOCN | varchar(10) | NO | | NULL | |
| OrigTier | varchar(10) | NO | | NULL | |
| TermRateDeck | varchar(20) | NO | | NULL | |
+---------------+-----------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
I have the following indexes:
+-------+------------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+---------------+
| Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment | Index_comment |
+-------+------------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+---------------+
| cdrs | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | id | A | 269622 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | |
| cdrs | 1 | id | 1 | id | A | 269622 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | |
| cdrs | 1 | call_time_index | 1 | StartTime | A | 269622 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | |
| cdrs | 1 | call_time_index | 2 | StopTime | A | 269622 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | |
+-------+------------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+---------------+
The query I am running is this:
SELECT MAX(cnt) AS max_channels FROM
(SELECT cl1.StartTime, COUNT(*) AS cnt
FROM cdrs cl1
INNER JOIN cdrs cl2
ON cl1.StartTime
BETWEEN cl2.StartTime AND cl2.StopTime
GROUP BY cl1.id)
AS counts;
It seems like I might have to chunk this data for each day and store the results in a separate table like simultaneous_calls.
I'm sure you want to know not only the maximum simultaneous calls, but when that happened.
I would create a table containing the timestamp of every individual minute
CREATE TABLE times (ts DATETIME UNSIGNED AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY);
INSERT INTO times (ts) VALUES ('2014-05-14 00:00:00');
. . . until 1440 rows, one for each minute . . .
Then join that to the calls.
SELECT ts, COUNT(*) AS count FROM times
JOIN cdrs ON times.ts BETWEEN cdrs.starttime AND cdrs.stoptime
GROUP BY ts ORDER BY count DESC LIMIT 1;
Here's the result in my test (MySQL 5.6.17 on a Linux VM running on a Macbook Pro):
+---------------------+----------+
| ts | count(*) |
+---------------------+----------+
| 2014-05-14 10:59:00 | 1001 |
+---------------------+----------+
1 row in set (1 min 3.90 sec)
This achieves several goals:
Reduces the number of rows examined by two orders of magnitude.
Reduces the execution time from 3 hours+ to about 1 minute.
Also returns the actual timestamp when the highest count was found.
Here's the EXPLAIN for my query:
explain select ts, count(*) from times join cdrs on times.ts between cdrs.starttime and cdrs.stoptime group by ts order by count(*) desc limit 1;
+----+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+---------+---------+------+--------+------------------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+---------+---------+------+--------+------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | times | index | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 5 | NULL | 1440 | Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 1 | SIMPLE | cdrs | ALL | starttime | NULL | NULL | NULL | 260727 | Range checked for each record (index map: 0x4) |
+----+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+---------+---------+------+--------+------------------------------------------------+
Notice the figures in the rows column, and compare to the EXPLAIN of your original query. You can estimate the total number of rows examined by multiplying these together (but that gets more complicated if your query is anything other than SIMPLE).
The inline view isn't strictly necessary. (You're right about a lot of time to run the EXPLAIN on the query with the inline view, the EXPLAIN will materialize the inline view (i.e. run the inline view query and populate the derived table), and then give an EXPLAIN on the outer query.
Note that this query will return an equivalent result:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS max_channels
FROM cdrs cl1
JOIN cdrs cl2
ON cl1.StartTime BETWEEN cl2.StartTime AND cl2.StopTime
GROUP BY cl1.id
ORDER BY max_channels DESC
LIMIT 1
Though it still has to do all the work, and probably doesn't perform any better; the EXPLAIN should run a lot faster. (We expect to see "Using temporary; Using filesort" in the Extra column.)
The number of rows in the resultset is going to be the number of rows in the table (~250,000 rows), and those are going to need to be sorted, so that's going to be some time there. The bigger issue (my gut is telling me) is that join operation.
I'm wondering if the EXPLAIN (or performance) would be any different if you swapped the cl1 and cl2 in the predicate, i.e.
ON cl2.StartTime BETWEEN cl1.StartTime AND cl1.StopTime
I'm thinking that, just because I'd be tempted to try a correlated subquery. That's ~250,000 executions, and that's not likely going to be any faster...
SELECT ( SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM cdrs cl2
WHERE cl2.StartTime BETWEEN cl1.StartTime AND cl1.StopTime
) AS max_channels
, cl1.StartTime
FROM cdrs cl1
ORDER BY max_channels DESC
LIMIT 11
You could run an EXPLAIN on that, we're still going to see a "Using temporary; Using filesort", and it will also show the "dependent subquery"...
Obviously, adding a predicate on the cl1 table to cut down the number of rows to be returned (for example, checking only the past 15 days); that should speed things up, but it doesn't get you the answer you want.
WHERE cl1.StartTime > NOW() - INTERVAL 15 DAY
(None of my musings here are sure-fire answers to your question, or solutions to the performance issue; they're just musings.)
My application is similar to Facebook, and I'm trying to optimize the query that get user records. The user records are that he as src ou dst. The src is in usermuralentry directly, the dst list are in usermuralentry_user.
So, a entry can have one src and many dst.
I have those tables:
mysql> desc usermuralentry ;
+-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| user_src_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| private | tinyint(1) | NO | | NULL | |
| content | longtext | NO | | NULL | |
| date | datetime | NO | | NULL | |
| last_update | datetime | NO | | NULL | |
+-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
10 rows in set (0.10 sec)
mysql> desc usermuralentry_user ;
+-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment |
| usermuralentry_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
| userinfo_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | |
+-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
3 rows in set (0.00 sec)
And the following query to retrieve information from two users.
mysql> explain
SELECT *
FROM usermuralentry AS a
, usermuralentry_user AS b
WHERE a.user_src_id IN ( 1, 2 )
OR
(
a.id = b.usermuralentry_id
AND b.userinfo_id IN ( 1, 2 )
);
+----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | b | ALL | usermuralentry_id,usermuralentry_user_bcd7114e,usermuralentry_user_6b192ca7 | NULL | NULL | NULL | 147188 | |
| 1 | SIMPLE | a | ALL | PRIMARY | NULL | NULL | NULL | 1371289 | Range checked for each record (index map: 0x1) |
+----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
but it is taking A LOT of time...
Some tips to optimize? Can the table schema be better in my application?
Use this query
SELECT *
FROM usermuralentry AS a
left join usermuralentry_user AS b
on b.usermuralentry_id = a.id
WHERE a.user_src_id IN(1, 2)
OR (a.id = b.usermuralentry_id
AND b.userinfo_id IN(1, 2));
And for some tips here are
You are using two tables in from clause which is a cartision product and will take a lot of time as well as undesired results. Always use joins in this situation.
I think your join isn't properly formed, and you need to change the query to use UNION. The OR condition in the where clause is killing performance as well:
SELECT *
FROM usermuralentry AS a
JOIN usermuralentry_user AS b ON a.id = b.usermuralentry_id /* use explicit JOIN! */
WHERE a.user_src_id IN (1 , 2)
UNION
SELECT *
FROM usermuralentry AS a
JOIN usermuralentry_user AS b ON a.id = b.usermuralentry_id
WHERE b.usermuralentry_id IN ( 1, 2 )
You also need an index: ALTER TABLE usermuralentry_user ADD INDEX (usermuralentry_id)
MySQL Server version: 5.0.95
Tables All: InnoDB
I am having an issue with a MySQL db query. Basically I am finding that if I index a particular varchar(50) field tag.name, my queries take longer (x10) than not indexing the field. I am trying to speed this query up, however my efforts seem to be counter productive.
The culprit line and field seems to be:
WHERE `t`.`name` IN ('news','home')
I have noticed that if i query the tag table directly without a join using the same criteria and with the name field indexed, i do not have the issue.. It actually works faster as expected.
EXAMPLE Query **
SELECT `a`.*, `u`.`pen_name`
FROM `tag_link` `tl`
INNER JOIN `tag` `t`
ON `t`.`tag_id` = `tl`.`tag_id`
INNER JOIN `article` `a`
ON `a`.`article_id` = `tl`.`link_id`
INNER JOIN `user` `u`
ON `a`.`user_id` = `u`.`user_id`
WHERE `t`.`name` IN ('news','home')
AND `tl`.`type` = 'article'
AND `a`.`featured` = 'featured'
GROUP BY `article_id`
LIMIT 0 , 5
EXPLAIN with index **
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------+--------+--------------------------+---------+---------+-------------------+------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | t | range | PRIMARY,name | name | 152 | NULL | 4 | Using where; Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 1 | SIMPLE | tl | ref | tag_id,link_id,link_id_2 | tag_id | 4 | portal.t.tag_id | 10 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | a | eq_ref | PRIMARY,fk_article_user1 | PRIMARY | 4 | portal.tl.link_id | 1 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | u | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | portal.a.user_id | 1 | |
+----+-------------+-------+--------+--------------------------+---------+---------+-------------------+------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
EXPLAIN without index **
+----+-------------+-------+--------+--------------------------+---------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------+--------+--------------------------+---------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | a | index | PRIMARY,fk_article_user1 | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 8742 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | u | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | portal.a.user_id | 1 | |
| 1 | SIMPLE | tl | ref | tag_id,link_id,link_id_2 | link_id | 4 | portal.a.article_id | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | t | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | portal.tl.tag_id | 1 | Using where |
+----+-------------+-------+--------+--------------------------+---------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
TABLE CREATE
CREATE TABLE `tag` (
`tag_id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`name` varchar(50) NOT NULL,
`type` enum('layout','image') NOT NULL,
`create_dttm` datetime default NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`tag_id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=43077 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8
INDEXS
SHOW INDEX FROM tag_link;
+----------+------------+----------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment |
+----------+------------+----------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| tag_link | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | tag_link_id | A | 42023 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| tag_link | 1 | tag_id | 1 | tag_id | A | 10505 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| tag_link | 1 | link_id | 1 | link_id | A | 14007 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
+----------+------------+----------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
SHOW INDEX FROM article;
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| article | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | article_id | A | 5723 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| article | 1 | fk_article_user1 | 1 | user_id | A | 1 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| article | 1 | create_dttm | 1 | create_dttm | A | 5723 | NULL | NULL | YES | BTREE | |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
Final Solution
It seems that MySQL is just sorted the data incorrectly. In the end it turned out faster to look at the tag table as a sub query returning the ids.
It seems that article_id is the primary key for the article table.
Since you're grouping by article_id, MySQL needs to return the records in order by that column, in order to perform the GROUP BY.
You can see that without the index, it scans all records in the article table, but they're at least in order by article_id, so no later sort is required. The LIMIT optimization can be applied here, since it's already in order, it can just stop after it gets five rows.
In the query with the index on tag.name, instead of scanning the entire articles table, it utilizes the index, but against the tag table, and starts there. Unfortunately, when doing this, the records must later be sorted by article.article_id in order to complete the GROUP BY clause. The LIMIT optimization can't be applied since it must return the entire result set, then order it, in order to get the first 5 rows.
In this case, MySQL just guesses wrongly.
Without the LIMIT clause, I'm guessing that using the index is faster, which is maybe what MySQL was guessing.
How big are your tables?
I noticed in the first explain you have a "Using temporary; Using filesort" which is bad. Your query is likely being dumped to disc which makes it way slower than in memory queries.
Also try to avoid using "select *" and instead query the minimum fields needed.
Our database is set up so that we have a credentials table that hold multiple different types of credentials (logins and the like). There's also a credential_pairs table that associates some of these types together (for instance, a user may have a password and security token).
In an attempt to see if a pair match, there is the following query:
SELECT DISTINCT cp.credential_id FROM credential_pairs AS cp
INNER JOIN credentials AS c1 ON (cp.primary_credential_id = c1.credential_id)
INNER JOIN credentials AS c2 ON (cp.secondary_credential_id = c2.credential_id)
WHERE c1.data = AES_ENCRYPT('Some Value 1', 'encryption key')
AND c2.data = AES_ENCRYPT('Some Value 2', 'encryption key');
This query works fine and gives us exactly what we need. HOWEVER, it is constantly showing in the slow query log (possibly due to lack of indexes?). When I ask MySQL to "explain" the query it gives me:
+----+-------------+-------+------+--------------------------------------------------------+---------------------+---------+-------+-------+--------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------+------+--------------------------------------------------------+---------------------+---------+-------+-------+--------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | c1 | ref | credential_id_UNIQUE,credential_id,ix_credentials_data | ix_credentials_data | 22 | const | 1 | Using where; Using temporary |
| 1 | SIMPLE | c2 | ref | credential_id_UNIQUE,credential_id,ix_credentials_data | ix_credentials_data | 22 | const | 1 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | cp | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 69197 | Using where; Using join buffer |
+----+-------------+-------+------+--------------------------------------------------------+---------------------+---------+-------+-------+--------------------------------+
I have a feeling that last entry (where it shows 69197 rows) is probably the problem, but I am FAR from a DBA... help?
credentials table:
CREATE TABLE `credentials` (
`hidden_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`credential_id` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`data` blob NOT NULL,
`credential_status` varchar(100) NOT NULL,
`insert_date` datetime NOT NULL,
`insert_user` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL,
`update_date` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`update_user` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL,
`delete_date` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`delete_user` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL,
`is_deleted` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY (`hidden_id`,`credential_id`),
UNIQUE KEY `credential_id_UNIQUE` (`credential_id`),
KEY `credential_id` (`credential_id`),
KEY `data` (`data`(10)),
KEY `credential_status` (`credential_status`(10))
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=1572 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8;
credential_pairs Table:
CREATE TABLE `credential_pairs` (
`hidden_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`credential_id` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`primary_credential_id` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`secondary_credential_id` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`is_deleted` tinyint(1) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`hidden_id`,`credential_id`),
KEY `primary_credential_id` (`primary_credential_id`(10)),
KEY `secondary_credential_id` (`secondary_credential_id`(10))
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=500 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
credentials Indexes:
+-------------+------------+----------------------+--------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment |
+-------------+------------+----------------------+--------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| credentials | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | hidden_id | A | 186235 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credentials | 0 | PRIMARY | 2 | credential_id | A | 186235 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credentials | 0 | credential_id_UNIQUE | 1 | credential_id | A | 186235 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credentials | 1 | credential_id | 1 | credential_id | A | 186235 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credentials | 1 | ix_credentials_data | 1 | data | A | 186235 | 20 | NULL | | BTREE | |
+-------------+------------+----------------------+--------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
credential_pair Indexes:
+------------------+------------+---------------------------------------------+--------------+-------------------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment |
+------------------+------------+---------------------------------------------+--------------+-------------------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
| credential_pairs | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | hidden_id | A | 69224 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credential_pairs | 0 | PRIMARY | 2 | credential_id | A | 69224 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credential_pairs | 1 | ix_credential_pairs_credential_id | 1 | credential_id | A | 69224 | 36 | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credential_pairs | 1 | ix_credential_pairs_primary_credential_id | 1 | primary_credential_id | A | 69224 | 36 | NULL | | BTREE | |
| credential_pairs | 1 | ix_credential_pairs_secondary_credential_id | 1 | secondary_credential_id | A | 69224 | 36 | NULL | | BTREE | |
+------------------+------------+---------------------------------------------+--------------+-------------------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+
UPDATE NOTES:
AFAICT: The DISTINCT was superfluous... nothing really needed it, so I dropped it. In an attempt to follow Fabrizio's advice to get a where on the credential_pairs lookup I then altered the statement to read as:
SELECT credential_id
FROM credential_pairs cp
WHERE cp.primary_credential_id = (SELECT credential_id FROM credentials WHERE data = AES_ENCRYPT('value 1','enc_key')) AND
cp.secondary_credential_id = (SELECT credential_id FROM credentials WHERE data = AES_ENCRYPT('value 2','enc_key'))
And.... nothing. The statement takes just as long and the explain looks pretty much the same. So, I added an index to the primary and secondary columns with:
ALTER TABLE credential_pairs ADD INDEX `idx_credential_pairs__primary_and_secondary`(`primary_credential_id`, `secondary_credential_id`);
And... nothing.
+----+-------------+-------------+-------+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+---------+------+-------+--------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------------+-------+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+---------+------+-------+--------------------------+
| 1 | PRIMARY | cp | index | NULL | idx_credential_pairs__primary_and_secondary | 514 | NULL | 69217 | Using where; Using index |
| 3 | SUBQUERY | credentials | ref | ix_credentials_data | ix_credentials_data | 22 | | 1 | Using where |
| 2 | SUBQUERY | credentials | ref | ix_credentials_data | ix_credentials_data | 22 | | 1 | Using where |
+----+-------------+-------------+-------+---------------------+---------------------------------------------+---------+------+-------+--------------------------+
It says it's using the index, but it still looks like it's table scanning. So, I added a joint key (as per a'r's comment below) with:
ALTER TABLE credential_pairs ADD KEY (primary_credential_id, secondary_credential_id);
And... same result as with the index (are these functionally the same?).
The DISTINCT is what is generating the "Use temporary", you usually want to avoid those when possible
Plus you are scanning the whole credential_pair table as you do not have any conditions against it so no indexes are used and the whole table is returned before applying the WHERE
hope it makes sense
EDIT/ADD
Try by starting from a different table, if I understand correctly, you have Table A, a Table B and a Table AB and you are starting the select from AB, try to start it from A
I haven't tested this, but you could try:
SELECT cp.credential_id
FROM credentials AS c1
LEFT JOIN credential_pairs AS cp ON (c1.credential_id = cp.primary_credential_id)
LEFT JOIN credentials AS c2 ON (cp.secondary_credential_id = c2.credential_id)
WHERE
c1.data = AES_ENCRYPT('Some Value 1', 'encryption key')
AND c2.data = AES_ENCRYPT('Some Value 2', 'encryption key');
I have had luck in the past by moving select tables around