I have a query that works, but it is slow. Is there a way to speed this up? Basically I have a table with timecard entries, and then a second table with time breakdowns of that entry, related by the TimecardID. What I am looking for is timeblocks that there are no breakdowns for. I thought if I cut the criteria down to 2 months that it would speed it up. Thanks for your help
SELECT * FROM Timecards
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT TimeCardID FROM TimecardBreakdown WHERE Timecards.ID = TimecardBreakdown.TimeCardID)
AND Status <> 0
AND DateIn >= CURRENT_DATE() - INTERVAL 2 MONTH
It seems you want to know the TimecardIDs which do not exist in the TimecardBreakdown table, in which case you can use the left outer join.
SELECT a.*
FROM Timecards a
LEFT OUTER JOIN TimecardBreakdown b ON a.TimecardID = b.TimecardID
WHERE b.TimecardID IS NULL
This would get rid of the subquery (which is expensive) and use join (which is more efficient).
MySQL stinks doing correlated subqueries fast. Try to make your subqueries independent and join them. You can use the LEFT JOIN ... IS NULL pattern to replace WHERE NOT EXISTS.
SELECT tc.*
FROM Timecards tc
LEFT JOIN TimecardBreakdown tcb ON tc.ID = tcb.TimeCardId
WHERE tc.DateIn >= CURRENT_DATE() - INTERVAL 2 MONTH
AND tc.Status <> 0
AND tcb.TimeCardId IS NULL
Some optimization points.
First, if you can change tc.Status <> 0 to tc.Status > 0 it makes an index range scan possible on that column.
Second, when you're optimizing stuff, SELECT * is considered harmful. Instead, if you can give the names of just the columns you need, things will be quicker. The database server has to sling around all the data you ask for; it can't tell if you're going to ignore some of it.
Third, this query will be helped by a compound index on Timecards (DateIn, Status, ID). That compound index can be used to do the heavy lifing of satisfying your query conditions.
That's called a covering index; it contains the data needed to satisfy much of your query. If you were to index just the DateIn column, then the query handler would have to bounce back to the main table to find the values of Status and ID. When those columns appear in the index, it saves that extra operation.
If you SELECT a certain set of columns rather than doing SELECT *, including those columns in the covering index can dramatically improve query performance. That's one of several reasons SELECT * is considered harmful.
(Some makes and model of DBMS have ways to specify lists of columns to ride along on indexes without actually indexing them. MySQL requires you to index them. But covering indexes still help.)
Read this: http://use-the-index-luke.com/
Related
I'm facing an issue with an SQL Query. I'm developing a php website, and to avoid making too much queries, I prefer to make a big one looking like :
select m.*, cj.*, cjb.*, me.pseudo as pseudo_acheteur
from mercato m
JOIN cartes_joueur cj
ON m.ID_carte = cj.ID_carte_joueur
JOIN cartes_joueur_base cjb
ON cj.ID_carte_joueur_base = cjb.ID_carte_joueur_base
JOIN membres me
ON me.ID_membre = cj.ID_membre
where not exists (select * from mercato_encheres me where me.ID_mercato = m.ID_mercato)
and cj.ID_membre = 2
and m.status <> 'cancelled'
ORDER BY total_carac desc, cj.level desc, cjb.nom_carte asc
This should return all cards sold by the member without any bet on it. In the result, I need all the information to display them.
Here is the approximate rows in each table :
mercato : 1200
cartes_joueur : 800 000
carte_joueur_base : 62
membres : 2000
mercato_enchere : 15 000
I tried to reduce them (in dev environment) by deleting old data; but the query still needs 10~15 seconds to execute (which is way too long on a website )
Thanks for your help.
Let's take a look.
The use of * in SELECT clauses is harmful to query performance. Why? It's wasteful. It needlessly adds to the volume of data the server must process, and in the case of JOINs, can force the processing of columns with duplicate values. If you possibly can do so, try to enumerate the columns you need.
You may not have useful indexes on your tables for accelerating this. We can't tell. Please notice that MySQL can't exploit multiple indexes in a single query, so to make a query fast you often need a well-chosen compound index. I suggest you try defining the index (ID_membre, ID_carte_jouer, ID_carte_joueur_base) on your cartes_joueur table. Why? Your query matches for equality on the first of those columns, and then uses the second and third column in ON conditions.
I have often found that writing a query with the largest table (most rows) first helps me think clearly about optimizing. In your case your largest table is cartes_jouer and you are choosing just one ID_membre value from that table. Your clearest path to optimization is the knowledge that you only need to examine approximately 400 rows from that table, not 800 000. An appropriate compound index will make that possible, and it's easiest to imagine that index's columns if the table comes first in your query.
You have a correlated subquery -- this one.
where not exists (select *
from mercato_encheres me
where me.ID_mercato = m.ID_mercato)
MySQL's query planner can be stupidly literal-minded when it sees this, running it thousands of times. In your case it's even worse: it's got SELECT * in it: see point 1 above.
It should be refactored to use the LEFT JOIN ... IS NULL pattern. Here's how that goes.
select whatever
from mercato m
JOIN ...
JOIN ...
LEFT JOIN mercato_encheres mench ON mench.ID_mercato = m.ID_mercato
WHERE mench.ID_mercato IS NULL
and ...
ORDER BY ...
Explanation: The use of LEFT JOIN rather than ordinary inner JOIN allows rows from the mercato table to be preserved in the output even when the ON condition does not match them to tables in the mercato_encheres table. The mismatching rows get NULL values for the second table. The mench.ID_mercato IS NULL condition in the WHERE clause then selects only the mismatching rows.
I have this query which basically goes through a bunch of tables to get me some formatted results but I can't seem to find the bottleneck. The easiest bottleneck was the ORDER BY RAND() but the performance are still bad.
The query takes from 10 sec to 20 secs without ORDER BY RAND();
SELECT
c.prix AS prix,
ST_X(a.point) AS X,
ST_Y(a.point) AS Y,
s.sizeFormat AS size,
es.name AS estateSize,
c.title AS title,
DATE_FORMAT(c.datePub, '%m-%d-%y') AS datePub,
dbr.name AS dateBuiltRange,
m.myId AS meuble,
c.rawData_id AS rawData_id,
GROUP_CONCAT(img.captionWebPath) AS paths
FROM
immobilier_ad_blank AS c
LEFT JOIN PropertyFeature AS pf ON (c.propertyFeature_id = pf.id)
LEFT JOIN Adresse AS a ON (c.adresse_id = a.id)
LEFT JOIN Size AS s ON (pf.size_id = s.id)
LEFT JOIN EstateSize AS es ON (pf.estateSize_id = es.id)
LEFT JOIN Meuble AS m ON (pf.meuble_id = m.id)
LEFT JOIN DateBuiltRange AS dbr ON (pf.dateBuiltRange_id = dbr.id)
LEFT JOIN ImageAd AS img ON (img.commonAd_id = c.rawData_id)
WHERE
c.prix != 0
AND pf.subCatMyId = 1
AND (
(
c.datePub > STR_TO_DATE('01-04-2016', '%d-%m-%Y')
AND c.datePub < STR_TO_DATE('30-04-2016', '%d-%m-%Y')
)
OR date_format(c.datePub, '%d-%m-%Y') = '30-04-2016'
)
AND a.validPoint = 1
GROUP BY
c.id
#ORDER BY
# RAND()
LIMIT
5000
Here is the explain query:
Visual Portion:
And here is a screenshot of mysqltuner
EDIT 1
I have many indexes Here they are:
EDIT 2:
So you guys did it. Down to .5 secs to 2.5 secs.
I mostly followed all of your advices and changed some of my.cnf + runned optimized on my tables.
You're searching for dates in a very suboptimal way. Try this.
... c.datePub >= STR_TO_DATE('01-04-2016', '%d-%m-%Y')
AND c.datePub < STR_TO_DATE('30-04-2016', '%d-%m-%Y') + INTERVAL 1 DAY
That allows a range scan on an index on the datePub column. You should create a compound index for that table on (datePub, prix, addresse_id, rawData_id) and see if it helps.
Also try an index on a (valid_point). Notice that your use of a geometry data type in that table is probably not helping anything.
To begin with you have quite a lot of indexes but many of them are not useful. Remember more indexes means slower inserts and updates. Also mysql is not good at using more than one index per table in complex queries. The following indexes have a cardinality < 10 and probably should be dropped.
IDX_...E88B
IDX....62AF
IDX....7DEE
idx2
UNIQ...F210
UNIQ...F210..
IDX....0C00
IDX....A2F1
At this point I got tired of the excercise, there are many more
Then you have some duplicated data.
point
lat
lng
The point field has the lat and lng in it. So the latter two are not needed. That means you can lose two more indexes idxlat and idxlng. I am not quite sure how idxlng appears twice in the index list for the same table.
These optimizations will lead to an overall increase in performance for INSERTS and UPDATES and possibly for all SELECTs as well because the query planner needs to spend less time deciding which index to use.
Then we notice from your explain that the query does not use any index on table Adresse (a). But your where clause has a.validPoint = 1 clearly you need an index on it as suggested by #Ollie-Jones
However I suspect that this index may have low cardinality. In that case I recommend that you create a composite index on this column + another.
The problem is your join with (a). The table has an index, but the index can't be used, more than likely due to the sort (/group by), or possibly incompatible types. The EXPLAIN shows three quarters of a million rows examined, this means that index lookup was not possible.
When designing a query, look for the smallest possible result set - search by that index, and then join from there. Perhaps "c" isn't the best table for the primary query.
(You could try using FORCE INDEX (id) on table a, if it doesn't work, the error may give you more information).
As others have pointed out, you need an index on a.validPoint but what about c.datePub that is also used in the WHERE clause. Why not a multiple column index on datePub, address_id the index on address_id is already used, so a multiple column index will be better here.
So I have this MySQL query, and as I have lots of records this gets very slow, the computers that use the software (cash registers) aren't that powerful either.
Is there a way to get the same result, but faster? Would really appreciate help!
SELECT d.sifra, COUNT(d.sifra) AS pogosti, c.*, s.Stevilka as Stev_sk FROM Cenik c, dnevna d, Podskupina s
WHERE d.sifra = c.Sifra AND d.datum >= DATE(DATE_SUB(NOW(),INTERVAL 3 DAY))
GROUP BY d.sifra ORDER BY pogosti DESC limit 27
Have you tried indexing?
You are using c.Sifra in the WHERE, so you probably want
CREATE INDEX Cenik_Sifra ON Cenik(Sifra);
Also you use datum and sifra from dnevna, and datum is your SELECT, so
CREATE INDEX dnevna_ndx ON dnevna(datum, sifra);
Finally there's no JOIN condition on Podskupina, whence you draw Stevilka. Is this a constant table? As it is, you're just counting rows in Podskupina and/or getting an unspecified value out of it, unless it only has the one row.
On some versions of MySQL you might also find benefit in pre-calculating the datum:
SELECT #datum := DATE(DATE_SUB(NOW(), INTERVAL 3 DAY))
and then use #datum in your query. This might improve its chances of a good indexed performance.
Without knowing more about the structure and cardinality of the involved tables, though, there's little that can be done.
At the very least you should post the result of
EXPLAIN SELECT...(your select)
in the question.
you don't have condition to join Podskupina s, and you get cross join (all to all), so you get x rows from join "d.sifra = c.Sifra" multiplicate by y rows of Podskupina s
This looks like a very problematic query. Do you really need to return all of c.* ? And where's the join or filter on Podskupina? Once you tighten the query, make sure you've created good indexes on the tables. For example, presuming you've already got a clustered index on a unique ID as a primary key in dnevna, performance would typically benefit by putting a secondary index on the sifra and datum columns.
I'm building a complex multi-table MySQL query, and even though it works, I'm wondering could I make it more simple.
The idea behind it is this, using the Events table that logs all site interaction, select the ID, Title, and Slug of the 10 most popular blog posts, and order by the most hits descending.
SELECT content.id, content.title, content.slug, COUNT(events.id) AS hits
FROM content, events
WHERE events.created >= DATE_SUB(NOW(), INTERVAL 1 MONTH)
AND events.page_url REGEXP '^/posts/[0-9]'
AND content.id = events.content_id
GROUP BY content.id
ORDER BY hits DESC
LIMIT 10
Blog post URLs have the following format:
/posts/2013-05-16-hello-world
As I mentioned it seems to work, but I'm sure I could be doing this cleaner.
Thanks,
The condition on created and the condition on page_url are both range conditions. You can get index-assistance for only one range condition per table in a SQL query, so you have to pick one or the other to index.
I would create an index on the events table over two columns (content_id, created).
ALTER TABLE events ADD KEY (content_id, created);
I'm assuming that restricting by created date is more selective than restricting by page_url, because I assume "/posts/" is going to match a large majority of the events.
After narrowing down the matching rows by created date, the page-url condition will have to be handled by the SQL layer, but hopefully that won't be too inefficient.
There is no performance difference between SQL-89 ("comma-style") join syntax and SQL-92 JOIN syntax. I do recommend SQL-92 syntax because it's more clear and it supports outer joins, but performance is not a reason to use it. The SQL query optimizer supports both join styles.
Temporary table and filesort are often costly for performance. This query is bound to create a temporary table and use a filesort, because you're using GROUP BY and ORDER BY against different columns. You can only hope that the temp table will be small enough to fit within your tmp_table_size limit (or increase that value). But that won't help if content.title or content.slug are BLOB/TEXT columns, the temp table will be forced to be spooled on disk anyway.
Instead of a regular expression, you can use the left function:
SELECT content.id, content.title, content.slug, COUNT(events.id) AS hits FROM content JOIN events ON content.id = events.content_id
WHERE events.created >= DATE_SUB(NOW(), INTERVAL 1 MONTH)
AND left( events.page_url, 7) = '/posts/'
GROUP BY content.id
ORDER BY hits DESC
LIMIT 10)
But that's just off the top of my head, and without a fiddle, untested. The JOIN suggestion, made in the comment, is also good and has been reflected in my answer.
I have a problem optimizing a really slow SQL query. I think is an index problem, but I can´t find which index I have to apply.
This is the query:
SELECT
cl.ID, cl.title, cl.text, cl.price, cl.URL, cl.ID AS ad_id, cl.cat_id,
pix.file_name, area.area_name, qn.quarter_name
FROM classifieds cl
/*FORCE INDEX (date_created) */
INNER JOIN classifieds_pix pix ON cl.ID = pix.classified_id AND pix.picture_no = 0
INNER JOIN zip_codes zip ON cl.zip_id = zip.zip_id AND zip.area_id = 132
INNER JOIN area_names area ON zip.area_id = area.id
LEFT JOIN quarter_names qn ON zip.quarter_id = qn.id
WHERE
cl.confirmed = 1
AND cl.country = 'DE'
AND cl.date_created <= NOW() - INTERVAL 1 DAY
ORDER BY
cl.date_created
desc LIMIT 7
MySQL takes about 2 seconds to get the result, and start working in pix.picture_no, but if I force index to "date_created" the query goes much faster, and takes only 0.030 s. But the problem is that the "INNER JOIN zip_codes..." is not always in the query, and when is not, the forced index make the query slow again.
I've been thinking in make a solution by PHP conditions, but I would like to know what is the problem with indexes.
These are several suggestions on how to optimize your query.
NOW Function - You're using the NOW() function in your WHERE clause. Instead, I recommend to use a constant date / timestamp, to allow the value to be cached and optimized. Otherwise, the value of NOW() will be evaluated for each row in the WHERE clause. An alternative to a constant value in case you need a dynamic value, is to add the value from the application (for example calculate the current timestamp and inject it to the query as a constant in the application before executing the query.
To test this recommendation before implementing this change, just replace NOW() with a constant timestamp and check for performance improvements.
Indexes - in general, I would suggest adding an index the contains all columns of your WHERE clause, in this case: confirmed, country, date_created. Start with the column that will cut the amount of data the most and move forward from there. Make sure you adjust the WHERE clause to the same order of the index, otherwise the index won't be used.
I used EverSQL SQL Query Optimizer to get these recommendations (disclaimer: I'm a co-founder of EverSQL and humbly provide these suggestions).
I would actually have a compound index on all elements of your where such as
(country, confirmed, date_created)
Having the country first would keep your optimized index subset to one country first, then within that, those that are confirmed, and finally the date range itself. Don't query on just the date index alone. Since you are ordering by date, the index should be able to optimize it too.
Add explain in front of the query and run it again. This will show you the indexes that are being used.
See: 13.8.2 EXPLAIN Statement
And for an explanation of explain see MySQL Explain Explained. Or: Optimizing MySQL: Queries and Indexes