MySQL prcedures take too much time and the tables are very large - mysql

I have a large live database where around 1000 users are updating 2 or more updates every minute. at the same time there are 4 users are getting reports and adding new items. the main 2 tables contains around 2 Million and 4 Million rows till present.
Queries using these tables are taking too much time, even simple queries like:
"SELECT COUNT(*) FROM MyItemsTable" and "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM MyTransactionsTable"
are taking 10 seconds and 26 seconds
large reports now are taking 15mins !!! toooooo much time.
All the table that I'm using are innodb
is there any way to solve this problem before I read about reputation ??
Thank you in advance for any help
Edit
Here is the structure and indexes of MyItemsTable:
CREATE TABLE `pos_MyItemsTable` (
`itemid` bigint(15) NOT NULL,
`uploadid` bigint(15) NOT NULL,
`itemtypeid` bigint(15) NOT NULL,
`statusid` int(1) NOT NULL,
`uniqueid` varchar(10) DEFAULT NULL,
`referencenb` varchar(30) DEFAULT NULL,
`serialnb` varchar(25) DEFAULT NULL,
`code` varchar(50) DEFAULT NULL,
`user` varchar(16) CHARACTER SET utf8 COLLATE utf8_bin DEFAULT NULL,
`pass` varchar(100) CHARACTER SET utf8 COLLATE utf8_bin DEFAULT NULL,
`expirydate` date DEFAULT NULL,
`userid` bigint(15) DEFAULT NULL,
`insertdate` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`updateuser` bigint(15) DEFAULT NULL,
`updatedate` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`counternb` int(1) DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY (`itemid`),
UNIQUE KEY `referencenb_unique` (`referencenb`),
KEY `MyItemsTable_r04` (`itemtypeid`),
KEY `MyItemsTable_r05` (`uploadid`),
KEY `FK_MyItemsTable` (`statusid`),
KEY `ind_MyItemsTable_serialnb` (`serialnb`),
KEY `uniqueid_key` (`uniqueid`),
KEY `ind_MyItemsTable_insertdate` (`insertdate`),
KEY `ind_MyItemsTable_counternb` (`counternb`),
CONSTRAINT `FK_MyItemsTable` FOREIGN KEY (`statusid`) REFERENCES `MyItemsTable_statuses` (`statusid`),
CONSTRAINT `MyItemsTable_r04` FOREIGN KEY (`itemtypeid`) REFERENCES `itemstypes` (`itemtypeid`) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION,
CONSTRAINT `MyItemsTable_r05` FOREIGN KEY (`uploadid`) REFERENCES `uploads` (`uploadid`) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8

Just having few indexes does not mean your tables and queries are optimized.
Try to identify the querties that run the slowest and add specific indexes there.
Selecting * from a huge table .. where you have columns that contain text / images / files
will be aways slow. Try to limit the selection of such fat columns when you don't need them.
future readings:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-index-types.html
http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/04/how-to-exploit-mysql-index-optimizations/
and some more advanced configurations:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/09/29/what-to-tune-in-mysql-server-after-installation/
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/11/03/choosing-innodb_buffer_pool_size/
source
UPDATE:
try to use composite keys for some of the heaviest queries,
by placing the main fields that are compared in ONE index:
`MyItemsTable_r88` (`itemtypeid`,`statusid`, `serialnb`), ...
this will give you faster results for queries that complare only columns from the index :
SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE `itemtypeid` = 5 AND `statusid` = 0 AND `serialnb` > 500
and extreamlly fast if you search and select values from the index:
SELECT `serialnb` FROM my_table WHERE `statusid` = 0 `itemtypeid` IN(1,2,3);
This are really basic examples you will have to read a bit more and analyze the data for the best results.

Related

Django slow inner join on a table with more than 10 million records

I am using mysql with Django. I am trying to count the number of visitor_pages for a specific dealer in a certain amount of time.
I would share the raw sql query that I have obtained from django debug toolbar.
SELECT COUNT(*) AS `__count`
FROM `visitor_page`
INNER JOIN `dealer_visitors`
ON (`visitor_page`.`dealer_visitor_id` = `dealer_visitors`.`id`)
WHERE (`visitor_page`.`date_time` BETWEEN '2021-02-01 05:51:00'
AND '2021-03-21 05:50:00'
AND `dealer_visitors`.`dealer_id` = 15)
The issue is that I have more than 13 million records in the visitor_pages table and about 1.5 million records in the dealer_visitor table. I have already indexed date_time. I am thinking of using a materialized view but before attempting that, I would really appreciate suggestions on how I could improve this query.
visitor_pages schema:
CREATE TABLE `visitor_page` (
`id` int NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`date_time` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`added_at` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`updated_at` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`page_id` int NOT NULL,
`dealer_visitor_id` int NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
KEY `visitor_page_page_id_246babdf_fk_web_page_id` (`page_id`),
KEY `visitor_page_dealer_visitor_id_e2dddea2_fk_dealer_visitors_id` (`dealer_visitor_id`),
KEY `visitor_page_date_time_06e9e9f5` (`date_time`),
CONSTRAINT `visitor_page_dealer_visitor_id_e2dddea2_fk_dealer_visitors_id` FOREIGN KEY (`dealer_visitor_id`) REFERENCES `dealer_visitors` (`id`),
CONSTRAINT `visitor_page_page_id_246babdf_fk_web_page_id` FOREIGN KEY (`page_id`) REFERENCES `web_page` (`id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=13626649 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
dealer_visitors schema:
CREATE TABLE `dealer_visitors` (
`id` int NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`visit_date` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`added_at` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`updated_at` datetime(6) DEFAULT NULL,
`dealer_id` int NOT NULL,
`visitor_id` int NOT NULL,
`type` int DEFAULT NULL,
`notes` longtext,
`location` varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
KEY `dealer_visitors_dealer_id_306e2202_fk_dealer_id` (`dealer_id`),
KEY `dealer_visitors_visitor_id_27ae498e_fk_visitor_id` (`visitor_id`),
KEY `dealer_visitors_type_af0f7d79` (`type`),
KEY `dealer_visitors_visit_date_f2b138c9` (`visit_date`),
CONSTRAINT `dealer_visitors_dealer_id_306e2202_fk_dealer_id` FOREIGN KEY (`dealer_id`) REFERENCES `dealer` (`id`),
CONSTRAINT `dealer_visitors_visitor_id_27ae498e_fk_visitor_id` FOREIGN KEY (`visitor_id`) REFERENCES `visitor` (`id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=1524478 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8mb4 COLLATE=utf8mb4_0900_ai_ci;
EXPLAIN ANALYZE the query gives me the following:
EXPLAIN:
For this query:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS `__count`
FROM visitor_page vp JOIN
dealer_visitors dv
ON vp.dealer_visitor_id = dv.id
WHERE vp.date_time BETWEEN '2021-02-01 05:51:00' AND '2021-03-21 05:50:00' AND
dv.dealer_id = 15;
The best indexes are on dealer_visitors(dealer_id, date_time, id) and visitor_page(dealer_visitor_id).
An index only on date helps a bit. But you are retrieving a month's worth of data and that might be a lot of data to process. Having dealer_id as the first column in the index will restrict the data to only the rows for that dealer in that time frame.
Depending on the distribution of the data, the Optimizer might pick one of the tables to start with, or pick the other. So, let's provide optimal indexes for each case:
ON `visitor_page`.`dealer_visitor_id` = `dealer_visitors`.`id`
WHERE `visitor_page`.`date_time` BETWEEN ...
AND `dealer_visitors`.`dealer_id` = 15
Starting with visitor_page:
visitor_page: INDEX(date_time) -- (already exists)
dealer_visitors: (already has PRIMARY KEY(id))
Starting with dealer_visitors:
dealer_visitors: INDEX(dealer_id) -- (already exists)
visitor_page: INDEX(dealer_visitor_id, date_time) -- in this order
and drop dealer_visitors_visitor_id_27ae498e_fk_visitor_id as now being redundant.
The net is to add one index and drop one index.
Materialized view -- It is often best for Data Warehouse reports to build and incrementally maintain a "summary table" (a "materialized view"). The very odd date range (1 month + 20 days - 61 seconds) makes this clumsy to do. Typically it is handy to make the table based on whole days. If you can shift to daily (or hourly), then see http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/summarytables
Something else to check: How much RAM do you have? What does SHOW VARIABLES LIKE 'innodb_buffer_pool_size'; say?
I see that the tables have different charset/collation. This is not a problem for the query in question, but if you have other queries that JOIN on VARCHARs, check that they use the same collation.

Aurora MySQL reader performance degrades over time

I have an Aurora MySQL cluster and when running queries against the reader I see a degradation in performance over time. A reboot of the reader results in query performance that matches the writer. But after going a week without a reboot queries take 25x as long to run.
The replication lag for the reader instance is 20ms and none of the monitoring metrics are showing issues. The highest I have seen the CPU is 40%. I tried a suggestion to set block_nested_loop to off but that had no effect.
The reader does not get much activity so load should not be an issue. We do need to run a complex query against it that returns a lot of data which is used for analytics. I have found that queries that return a small number of records that are retrieved by an index do NOT have the performance problem. But a similar query that returns the same small number of records and requires a table scan does have the performance problem.
The rate of degradation seems consistent, so it seems like a resource issue related to replication, but I have not had any luck finding anything online documenting the issue.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Update: Additional details
Query execution plans
-- Fast query
explain select cpv.SHORT_TEXT_VALUE, c.UIDPK, c.GUID, c.SHARED_ID, cpv.*
from TCUSTOMERPROFILEVALUE cpv
inner join TCUSTOMER c on cpv.CUSTOMER_UID = c.UIDPK
where LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY = 'CP_EMAIL' and cpv.SHORT_TEXT_VALUE = 'some-email#gmail.com';
-- Slow query, using function to prevent use of index for email match
explain select cpv.SHORT_TEXT_VALUE, c.UIDPK, c.GUID, c.SHARED_ID, cpv.*
from TCUSTOMERPROFILEVALUE cpv
inner join TCUSTOMER c on cpv.CUSTOMER_UID = c.UIDPK
where LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY = 'CP_EMAIL' and LOWER(cpv.SHORT_TEXT_VALUE) = 'some-email#gmail.com';
Table definitions
CREATE TABLE `TCUSTOMERPROFILEVALUE` (
`UIDPK` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
`ATTRIBUTE_UID` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
`ATTRIBUTE_TYPE` int(11) NOT NULL,
`LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`SHORT_TEXT_VALUE` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`LONG_TEXT_VALUE` mediumtext,
`INTEGER_VALUE` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`DECIMAL_VALUE` decimal(19,2) DEFAULT NULL,
`BOOLEAN_VALUE` int(11) DEFAULT '0',
`DATE_VALUE` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`CUSTOMER_UID` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`LAST_MODIFIED_DATE` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
`CREATION_DATE` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
PRIMARY KEY (`UIDPK`),
KEY `I_CPV_ATTR_UID` (`ATTRIBUTE_UID`),
KEY `I_CPV_CUID_ATTKEY` (`CUSTOMER_UID`,`LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY`),
KEY `I_CPV_STV_ATTVALUE` (`SHORT_TEXT_VALUE`),
KEY `I_CPV_ATTKEY_SHORTTEXT` (`LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY`,`SHORT_TEXT_VALUE`),
CONSTRAINT `FK_PROFILE_CUSTOMER` FOREIGN KEY (`CUSTOMER_UID`) REFERENCES `TCUSTOMER` (`UIDPK`) ON DELETE CASCADE,
CONSTRAINT `TCUSTOMERPROFILEVALUE_FK_1` FOREIGN KEY (`ATTRIBUTE_UID`) REFERENCES `TATTRIBUTE` (`UIDPK`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COMMENT='values associated with customer profiles.'
CREATE TABLE `TCUSTOMER` (
`UIDPK` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
`PREF_BILL_ADDRESS_UID` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`PREF_SHIP_ADDRESS_UID` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`CREATION_DATE` datetime NOT NULL,
`LAST_EDIT_DATE` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
`GUID` varchar(64) NOT NULL,
`STATUS` int(11) NOT NULL,
`AUTHENTICATION_UID` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`STORECODE` varchar(64) DEFAULT NULL,
`IS_FIRST_TIME_BUYER` tinyint(4) DEFAULT '1',
`CUSTOMER_TYPE` varchar(64) NOT NULL,
`SHARED_ID` varchar(255) NOT NULL,
`PARENT_CUSTOMER_GUID` varchar(64) DEFAULT NULL,
`DTYPE` varchar(40) DEFAULT 'ExtCustomerImpl',
`LAST_SESSION_DATE` timestamp NULL DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`UIDPK`),
UNIQUE KEY `TCUSTOMER_UNIQUE` (`GUID`),
UNIQUE KEY `TCUSTOMER_SHARED_ID_TYPE_UNIQ` (`SHARED_ID`,`CUSTOMER_TYPE`),
UNIQUE KEY `I_CUST_AUTH_UID` (`AUTHENTICATION_UID`),
UNIQUE KEY `SHARED_ID` (`SHARED_ID`,`STORECODE`),
KEY `I_CUST_CR_DATE` (`CREATION_DATE`),
KEY `I_CUST_STORE_CODE` (`STORECODE`),
KEY `I_TYPE_LAST_EDIT` (`CUSTOMER_TYPE`,`LAST_EDIT_DATE`),
KEY `I_CUSTOMER_SHAREDID` (`SHARED_ID`),
KEY `I_CUSTOMER_PARENT` (`PARENT_CUSTOMER_GUID`),
CONSTRAINT `CUSTOMER_STORECODE_FK` FOREIGN KEY (`STORECODE`) REFERENCES `TSTORE` (`STORECODE`),
CONSTRAINT `TCUSTOMER_PARENT_GUID_FK` FOREIGN KEY (`PARENT_CUSTOMER_GUID`) REFERENCES `TCUSTOMER` (`GUID`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COMMENT='customer account information.'
Indexes
Well, I can't explain the shift in performance unless the Optimizer is randomly shifting between different query plans.
I do see that you are using the notorious Entity-Attribute-Value schema design. And doing it in a rather bulky and complex way -- with multiple columns for different datatypes.
I do see a few things that can probably help performance in general as the dataset grows. (I assume it will grow.)
The primary key, UIDPK of the attribute table TCUSTOMERPROFILEVALUE probably has no use. This will probably be better: PRIMARY KEY(CUSTOMER_UID, ATTRIBUTE_UID). Or maybe that should be LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY??? Why are there two columns for the attribute?
When changing the PK, this KEY I_CPV_ATTKEY_SHORTTEXT (LOCALIZED_ATTRIBUTE_KEY,SHORT_TEXT_VALUE) would implicitly have CUSTOMER_UID added on the end, thereby benefiting your JOIN.
BIGINT is usually overkill; consider using a smaller datatype.
Do you have another attribute table - TATTRIBUTE?
Having 5 UNIQUE keys for a table slows down inserts. Perhaps you can have fewer?
INDEX(SHARED_ID) is redundant since there are other keys starting with that column.
Have your tried removing the LOWER(xxxx) from the SLOW QUERY?
If this corrects the problem, and your results are the same, you were just wasting time with the LOWER(xxx) manipulation.

Speed Up A Large Insert From Select Query With Multiple Joins

I'm trying to denormalize a few MySQL tables I have into a new table that I can use to speed up some complex queries with lots of business logic. The problem that I'm having is that there are 2.3 million records I need to add to the new table and to do that I need to pull data from several tables and do a few conversions too. Here's my query (with names changed)
INSERT INTO database_name.log_set_logs
(offload_date, vehicle, jurisdiction, baselog_path, path,
baselog_index_guid, new_location, log_set_name, index_guid)
(
select STR_TO_DATE(logset_logs.offload_date, '%Y.%m.%d') as offload_date,
logset_logs.vehicle, jurisdiction, baselog_path, path,
baselog_trees.baselog_index_guid, new_location, logset_logs.log_set_name,
logset_logs.index_guid
from
(
SELECT SUBSTRING_INDEX(SUBSTRING_INDEX(path, '/', 7), '/', -1) as offload_date,
SUBSTRING_INDEX(SUBSTRING_INDEX(path, '/', 8), '/', -1) as vehicle,
SUBSTRING_INDEX(path, '/', 9) as baselog_path, index_guid,
path, log_set_name
FROM database_name.baselog_and_amendment_guid_to_path_mappings
) logset_logs
left join database_name.log_trees baselog_trees
ON baselog_trees.original_location = logset_logs.baselog_path
left join database_name.baselog_offload_location location
ON location.baselog_index_guid = baselog_trees.baselog_index_guid);
The query itself works because I was able to run it using a filter on log_set_name however that filter's condition will only work for less than 1% of the total records because one of the values for log_set_name has 2.2 million records in it which is the majority of the records. So there is nothing else I can use to break this query up into smaller chunks from what I can see. The problem is that the query is taking too long to run on the rest of the 2.2 million records and it ends up timing out after a few hours and then the transaction is rolled back and nothing is added to the new table for the 2.2 million records; only the 0.1 million records were able to be processed and that was because I could add a filter that said where log_set_name != 'value with the 2.2 million records'.
Is there a way to make this query more performant? Am I trying to do too many joins at once and perhaps I should populate the row's columns in their own individual queries? Or is there some way I can page this type of query so that MySQL executes it in batches? I already got rid of all my indexes on the log_set_logs table because I read that those will slow down inserts. I also jacked my RDS instance up to a db.r4.4xlarge write node. I am also using MySQL Workbench so I increased all of it's timeout values to their maximums giving them all nines. All three of these steps helped and were necessary in order for me to get the 1% of the records into the new table but it still wasn't enough to get the 2.2 million records without timing out. Appreciate any insights as I'm not adept to this type of bulk insert from a select.
'CREATE TABLE `log_set_logs` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`purged` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAUL,
`baselog_path` text,
`baselog_index_guid` varchar(36) DEFAULT NULL,
`new_location` text,
`offload_date` date NOT NULL,
`jurisdiction` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`vehicle` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`index_guid` varchar(36) NOT NULL,
`path` text NOT NULL,
`log_set_name` varchar(60) NOT NULL,
`protected_by_retention_condition_1` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''1'',
`protected_by_retention_condition_2` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''1'',
`protected_by_retention_condition_3` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''1'',
`protected_by_retention_condition_4` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''1'',
`general_comments_about_this_log` text,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=1736707 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1'
'CREATE TABLE `baselog_and_amendment_guid_to_path_mappings` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`path` text NOT NULL,
`index_guid` varchar(36) NOT NULL,
`log_set_name` varchar(60) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
KEY `log_set_name_index` (`log_set_name`),
KEY `path_index` (`path`(42))
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=2387821 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1'
...
'CREATE TABLE `baselog_offload_location` (
`baselog_index_guid` varchar(36) NOT NULL,
`jurisdiction` varchar(20) NOT NULL,
KEY `baselog_index` (`baselog_index_guid`),
KEY `jurisdiction` (`jurisdiction`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1'
'CREATE TABLE `log_trees` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`baselog_index_guid` varchar(36) DEFAULT NULL,
`original_location` text NOT NULL, -- This is what I have to join everything on and since it's text I cannot index it and the largest value is above 255 characters so I cannot change it to a vachar then index it either.
`new_location` text,
`distcp_returncode` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`distcp_job_id` text,
`distcp_stdout` text,
`distcp_stderr` text,
`validation_attempt` int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''0'',
`validation_result` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''0'',
`archived` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''0'',
`archived_at` timestamp NULL DEFAULT NULL,
`created_at` timestamp NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
`updated_at` timestamp NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
`dir_exists` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''0'',
`random_guid` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT ''0'',
`offload_date` date NOT NULL,
`vehicle` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
UNIQUE KEY `baselog_index_guid` (`baselog_index_guid`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=1028617 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1'
baselog_offload_location has not PRIMARY KEY; what's up?
GUIDs/UUIDs can be terribly inefficient. A partial solution is to convert them to BINARY(16) to shrink them. More details here: http://localhost/rjweb/mysql/doc.php/uuid ; (MySQL 8.0 has similar functions.)
It would probably be more efficient if you have a separate (optionally redundant) column for vehicle rather than needing to do
SUBSTRING_INDEX(SUBSTRING_INDEX(path, '/', 8), '/', -1) as vehicle
Why JOIN baselog_offload_location? Three seems to be no reference to columns in that table. If there, be sure to qualify them so we know what is where. Preferably use short aliases.
The lack of an index on baselog_index_guid may be critical to performance.
Please provide EXPLAIN SELECT ... for the SELECT in your INSERT and for the original (slow) query.
SELECT MAX(LENGTH(original_location)) FROM .. -- to see if it really is too big to index. What version of MySQL are you using? The limit increased recently.
For the above item, we can talk about having a 'hash'.
"paging the query". I call it "chunking". See http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/deletebig#deleting_in_chunks . That talks about deleting, but it can be adapted to INSERT .. SELECT since you want to "chunk" the select. If you go with chunking, Javier's comment becomes moot. Your code would be chunking the selects, hence batching the inserts:
Loop:
INSERT .. SELECT .. -- of up to 1000 rows (see link)
End loop

update table takes long time in mysql?

CREATE TABLE fa (
book varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
PRODUCTION varchar(1000) DEFAULT NULL,
VENDOR_LEVEL varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
BOOK_NO int(10) DEFAULT NULL,
UNSTABLE_TIME_PERIOD varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
`PERIOD_YEAR` int(10) DEFAULT NULL,
promo_3_visuals_manual_drag int(10) DEFAULT NULL,
BOOK_NO int(10) DEFAULT NULL,
PRODUCT_LEVEL_DIST varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
PRODUCT_LEVEL_ACV_TREND varchar(100) DEFAULT NULL,
KEY book (BOOK_NO),
KEY period (PERIOD_YEAR)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8
Index we added to column
Index : BOOK_NO and PERIODIC_YEAR has added
we cant add unique nor primary key to both column as it has plenty of duplicate values in it.
There are 46 millions rows.
We tried partitioning to period year and catno for sub partition, but doesn't worked as it is still takes long time
When i run the update query :
update fa set UNSTABLE_TIME_PERIOD = NULL where BOOK_NO = 0 and periodic_year = 201502;
It taking me more than 7 min , how can i OPTIMIZE the query?
Instead of creating 2 different keys, create single composite key for both the columns like:
KEY book_period (BOOK_NO, PERIOD_YEAR)
Also, first filter the records based on the column which will return the small set of records as compare to other.
If you think BOOK_NO will return less number of records as compare to PERIOD_YEAR, Use BOOK_NO first in where clause else use PERIOD_YEAR first and create the key accordingly.
As Álvaro González said, you should use some sort of key (eg. a Primary Key).
Adding a Primary Key:
CREATE TABLE fa (
<your_id>,
{...},
PRIMARY KEY(<your_id>),
{...}
)
or
CREATE TABLE fa (
<your_id> PRIMARY KEY,
{...}
)
It'd be a good idea to make your PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT too for convenience, but this is not essenitial.

Simple select query takes more time in very large table in MySQL database in C# application

I am using a MySQL database in my ASP.NET with C# web application. The MySQL Server version is 5.7 and there is 8 GB RAM in the PC. When I am executing the select query in MySQL database table, it takes more time in execution; a simple select query takes around 42 seconds. Across 1 crorerecord (10 million records) in the table. I have also done indexing for the table. How can I fix this?
The following is my table structure.
CREATE TABLE `smstable_read` (
`MessageID` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`ApplicationID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`Api_userid` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`ReturnMessageID` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`Sequence_Id` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`messagetext` longtext,
`adtextid` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`mobileno` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`deliverystatus` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`SMSlength` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`DOC` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`DOM` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`BatchID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`StudentID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`SMSSentTime` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`SMSDeliveredTime` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`SMSDeliveredTimeTicks` decimal(28,0) DEFAULT '0',
`SMSSentTimeTicks` decimal(28,0) DEFAULT '0',
`Sent_SMS_Day` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`Sent_SMS_Month` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`Sent_SMS_Year` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`smssent` int(11) DEFAULT '1',
`Batch_Name` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`User_ID` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`Year_ID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`Date_Time` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`IsGroup` double DEFAULT NULL,
`Date_Time_Ticks` decimal(28,0) DEFAULT NULL,
`IsNotificationSent` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`Module_Id` double DEFAULT NULL,
`Doc_Batch` decimal(28,0) DEFAULT NULL,
`SMS_Category_ID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`SID` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`MessageID`),
KEY `index2` (`ReturnMessageID`),
KEY `index3` (`mobileno`),
KEY `BatchID` (`BatchID`),
KEY `smssent` (`smssent`),
KEY `deliverystatus` (`deliverystatus`),
KEY `day` (`Sent_SMS_Day`),
KEY `month` (`Sent_SMS_Month`),
KEY `year` (`Sent_SMS_Year`),
KEY `index4` (`ApplicationID`,`SMSSentTimeTicks`),
KEY `smslength` (`SMSlength`),
KEY `studid` (`StudentID`),
KEY `batchid_studid` (`BatchID`,`StudentID`),
KEY `User_ID` (`User_ID`),
KEY `Year_Id` (`Year_ID`),
KEY `IsNotificationSent` (`IsNotificationSent`),
KEY `isgroup` (`IsGroup`),
KEY `SID` (`SID`),
KEY `SMS_Category_ID` (`SMS_Category_ID`),
KEY `SMSSentTimeTicks` (`SMSSentTimeTicks`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=16513292 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8;
The following is my select query:
SELECT messagetext, SMSSentTime, StudentID, batchid,
User_ID,MessageID,Sent_SMS_Day, Sent_SMS_Month,
Sent_SMS_Year,Module_Id,Year_ID,Doc_Batch
FROM smstable_read
WHERE StudentID=977 AND SID = 8582 AND MessageID>16013282
You need to learn about compound indexes and covering indexes. Read about those things.
Your query is slow because it's doing a half-scan of the table. It uses the primary key to find the first row with a qualifying MessageID, then looks at every row of the table to find matching rows.
Your filter criteria are StudentID = constant, SID = constant AND MessageID > constant. That means you need those three columns, in that order, in an index. The first two filter criteria will random-access your index to the correct place. The third criterion will scan the index starting right after the constant value in your query. It's called an Index Range Scan operation, and it's quite efficient.
ALTER TABLE smstable_read
ADD INDEX StudentSidMessage (StudentId, SID, MessageId);
This compound index should make your query efficient. Notice that in MyISAM, the primary key column of a table should appear in compound indexes. That's cool in this case because it's also part of your query criteria.
If this query is used very frequently, you could make a covering index: you could add the other columns of the query (the ones mentioned in your SELECT clause) to the index.
But, unfortunately you have defined your messageText column with a longtext data type. That allows for each message to contain up to four gigabytes. (Why? Is this really SMS data? There's a limit of 160 bytes per message in SMS. Four gigabytes >> 160 bytes.)
Now the point of a covering index is to allow the query to be satisfied entirely from the index, without referring back to the table. But when you include a longtext or any other LOB column in an index, it only contains a subset of the data. So the point of the covering index is lost.
If I were you I would change my table so messageText was a VARCHAR(255) data type, and then create this covering index:
ALTER TABLE smstable_read
ADD INDEX StudentSidMessage (StudentId, SID, MessageId,
SMSSentTime, batchid,
User_ID, Sent_SMS_Day, Sent_SMS_Month,
Sent_SMS_Year,Module_Id,Year_ID,Doc_Batch,
messageText);
(Notice that you should put variable-length items last in the index if you can.)
If you can't change your application to handle VARCHAR(255) then go with the first index I mentioned.
Pro tip: putting lots of single-column indexes on MySQL tables rarely helps SELECT performance and always harms INSERT and UPDATE performance. You need an index on your primary key, and you need indexes to support the queries you run. Extra indexes are harmful.
It looks like your database is not properly indexed and even not properly normalized. Normalizing your database will go a long way to speed up all your queries. Particularly in view of the fact that mysql used only one index per table in a query. Even though you have lot's of indexes, they cannot be used.
Your current query filters on StudentID,SID, and MessageID. The last is an inequality comparision so an index will not be very effective with that but the other two columns are equality comparisons. I suggest an index like this:
KEY `studid` (`StudentID`,`SID`)
Follow that up by dropping your existing index on SID. If you find that you don't want to drop it because it's used in another query, further evidence that your table is in desperate need of normalization.
Too many indexes slow down inserts and adds a little overhead to each SELECT because the query planner needs more effort to figure out which index to use.