optimising and scaling mysql structure + queries for large mailing groups - mysql

So I have a system that stores contacts and allows them to be put into groups. These groups can be defined by criteria (everyone with surname 'smith'), or by explicitly adding / excluding people.
The problem I am having is that when I list the mailing groups, I need to count how many contacts are in each one. This number can change as contacts are added / removed from the contacts table. On small groups / amounts of contacts it is fine, however using 50k ish contacts runs into problems
An example query I use for this is as follows:
SELECT COUNT(c_id) FROM contacts, mgroups
LEFT JOIN mgroups_explicit ON mg_id = me_mg_id
WHERE mgroups.site_id = '10'
AND mg_id = '20'
AND me_c_id = c_id
AND contacts.site_id = '10'
OR (contacts.site_id = '10' AND ( c_tags LIKE '%tag1%')) AND c_id NOT IN
( SELECT mex_c_id FROM mgroups_exclude WHERE c_id = mex_c_id ) GROUP BY c_id
The criteria table does not feature in this query, as the problem presents itself when large groups are created explicitly, rather than with a criteria. This is required as criteria based groups grow or shrink on the fly as you modify your contacts, where as explicit is generally set in stone. So in this case, if you explicitly add 20k contacts to a group, it adds 20k rows to the table marked with that mg_id as a foreign key.
This basically takes ages / times out / gets the wrong number / generally doesn't work very well. I either need to figure out a more efficient query, or figure out a better way to store everything.
Any ideas?
The 5 main tables that make up the database
contacts - where the actual contacts reside
Field Type Null Default Comments
c_id int(8) No
site_id int(6) No
c_email varchar(500) No
c_source varchar(255) No
c_subscribed tinyint(1) No 0
c_special tinyint(1) No 0
c_domain text No
c_title varchar(12) No
c_name varchar(128) No
c_surname varchar(128) No
c_company varchar(128) No
c_jtitle text No
c_ad1 text No
c_ad2 text No
c_ad3 text No
c_county varchar(64) No
c_city varchar(128) No
c_postcode varchar(32) No
c_lat varchar(100) No
c_lng varchar(100) No
c_country varchar(64) No
c_tel varchar(20) No
c_mob varchar(20) No
c_dob date No
c_registered datetime No
c_updated datetime No
c_twitter varchar(255) No
c_facebook varchar(255) No
c_tags text No
c_special_1 text No
c_special_2 text No
c_special_3 text No
c_special_4 text No
c_special_5 text No
c_special_6 text No
c_special_7 text No
c_special_8 text No
mgroups - basic mailing group info
Field Type Null Default Comments
mg_id int(8) No
site_id int(6) No
mg_name varchar(255) No
mg_created datetime No
mgroups_criteria - criteria for said mailing groups
Field Type Null Default Comments
mc_id int(8) No
site_id int(6) No
mc_mg_id int(8) No
mc_criteria text No
mgroups_exclude - anyone to exclude from criteria
Field Type Null Default Comments
mex_id int(8) No
site_id int(6) No
mex_c_id int(8) No
mex_mg_id int(8) No
mgroups_explicit - anyone to explicitly add without the use of criteria
Field Type Null Default Comments
me_id int(8) No
site_id int(6) No
me_c_id int(8) No
me_mg_id int(8) No
And the indexs / explain of query. Must admit, indexes are not my strong point, any improvements?
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 PRIMARY mgroups ALL PRIMARY,mg_id NULL NULL NULL 9 Using temporary; Using filesort
1 PRIMARY mgroups_explicit ref me_mg_id me_mg_id 4 engine_4.mgroups.mg_id 8750
1 PRIMARY contacts ALL PRIMARY,c_id NULL NULL NULL 86012 Using where; Using join buffer
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Impossible WHERE noticed after reading const table...

I don't see any indexes in the schema above, you do have indexes don't you?
run an explain on the query
EXPLAIN
SELECT COUNT(c_id) FROM
contacts, mgroups LEFT JOIN mgroups_explicit ON mg_id = me_mg_id
WHERE
mgroups.site_id = '10'
AND mg_id = '20'
AND me_c_id = c_id
AND contacts.site_id = '10'
OR (contacts.site_id = '10'
AND ( c_tags LIKE '%tag1%'))
AND c_id NOT IN (SELECT mex_c_id FROM mgroups_exclude WHERE c_id = mex_c_id ) GROUP BY c_id
That will tell you about what indexes are being used how many records it has to sort through etc..
DC

Right so I got this answered elsewhere (Huge thanks to Hambut_Bulge), so for the sake of it being useful to anyone else heres the solution:
First things off you're mixing old and new (ANSI) style joins in the same query. This is considered a bad idea in SQL circles. By old style I mean we write a query with a join along these lines
SELECT a.column_name, b.column2
FROM table1 a, second_table b
WHERE a.id_key = b.fid_key
AND b.some_other_criteria = 'Y';
In the newer ANSI style we'd rewrite the above to this:
SELECT a.column_name, b.column2
FROM table1 a INNER JOIN second_table b ON a.id_key = b.fid_key
WHERE b.some_other_criteria = 'Y';
Its neater and easier to read which bits are join conditions and which are where clauses. Its also best to get into the habit of using ANSI style as old style support may (at some point) be discontinued.
Also try and be consistent in your use of dot notation and/or aliases. Again it makes big queries easier to read.
Back to your problem query, I began by starting to convert it into ANSI style and straight-away noticed that you don't have a join condition between contacts and mgroups. This means that optimizer will create a cross join (also called a cartesian product), which was probably something you don't want to do. The cross join (in case you didn't know) joins every row in the contacts table with every row in the mgroups table. So if you have 50,000 rows in contacts and 20,000 rows in mgroup you're going to get a joined result set containing 1,000,000,000 rows!
The other thing that is going to slow this query drastically is the subquery on mgroups_exclude. A subquery is executed once for each row in the outer query eg:
SELECT a.column1
FROM table1 a
WHERE a.id_key NOT IN ( SELECT * FROM table2 b WHERE a.id_key = b.fid_key);
Assume that table1 has 2,000,000 rows and table2 has 500,000. For each and every row in the outer query (table1) the database is going to have to do a full scan on the inner query. So to get a result the database will have read 1,000,000,000,000 rows and we may only be interested in 1,000! It will not touch any indexes no matter what.
To get around this we can use a left join (also called a left outer join) on the two tables.
SELECT a.column1
FROM table1 a LEFT JOIN table2 b ON a.id_key = b.fid_key
WHERE b.fid_key IS NULL;
An outer join does not require each record in the joined tables to have a matching record. So the example above we'd get all the records from table1 even if there is no match on table2. For non-matched records the database returns a NULL and we can test for that in the where clause. Now the optimizer can scan the indexes on the two tables id_key fields (assuming there are any), resulting in a much faster query.
So, to wrap up. I'd rewrite your orginal query thus:
SELECT COUNT( a.c_id )
FROM contacts a
INNER JOIN mgroups b ON a.c_id = b.mg_id
LEFT JOIN mgroups_explicit c ON b.mg_id = c.me_mg_id
LEFT JOIN mgroups_exclude d ON a.c_id = d.mex_c_id
WHERE b.mg_id = '20'
AND a.site_id = '10'
AND a.c_tags LIKE '%tag1%'
AND d.mex_c_id IS NULL
GROUP BY c_id;

Related

MYSQL ERROR CODE: 1288 - can't update with join statement

Thanks for past help.
While doing an update using a join, I am getting the 'Error Code: 1288. The target table _____ of the UPDATE is not updatable' and figure out why. I can update the table with a simple update statement (UPDATE sales.customerABC Set contractID = 'x';) but can't using a join like this:
UPDATE (
SELECT * #where '*' contains columns a.uniqueID and a.contractID
FROM sales.customerABC
WHERE contractID IS NULL
) as a
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT uniqueID, contractID
FROM sales.tblCustomers
WHERE contractID IS NOT NULL
) as b
ON a.uniqueID = b.uniqueID
SET a.contractID = b.contractID;
If changing that update statement a SELECT such as:
SELECT * FROM (
SELECT *
FROM opwSales.dealerFilesCTS
WHERE pcrsContractID IS NULL
) as a
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT uniqueID, pcrsContractID
FROM opwSales.dealerFileLoad
WHERE pcrsContractID IS NOT NULL
) as b
ON a."Unique ID" = b.uniqueID;
the result table would contain these columns:
a.uniqueID, a.contractID, b.uniqueID, b.contractID
59682204, NULL, NULL, NULL
a3e8e81d, NULL, NULL, NULL
cfd1dbf9, NULL, NULL, NULL
5ece009c, , 5ece009c, B123
5ece0d04, , 5ece0d04, B456
5ece7ab0, , 5ece7ab0, B789
cfd21d2a, NULL, NULL, NULL
cfd22701, NULL, NULL, NULL
cfd23032, NULL, NULL, NULL
I pretty much have all database privileges and can't find restrictions with the table reference data. Can't find much information online concerning the error code, either.
Thanks in advance guys.
You cannot update a sub-select because it's not a "real" table - MySQL cannot easily determine how the sub-select assignment maps back to the originating table.
Try:
UPDATE customerABC
JOIN tblCustomers USING (uniqueID)
SET customerABC.contractID = tblCustomers.contractID
WHERE customerABC.contractID IS NULL AND tblCustomers.contractID IS NOT NULL
Notes:
you can use a full JOIN instead of a LEFT JOIN, since you want uniqueID to exist and not be null in both tables. A LEFT JOIN would generate extra NULL rows from tblCustomers, only to have them shot down by the clause requirement that tblCustomers.contractID be not NULL. Since they allow more stringent restrictions on indexes, JOINs tend to be more efficient than LEFT JOINs.
since the field has the same name in both tables you can replace ON (a.field1 = b.field1) with the USING (field1) shortcut.
you obviously strongly want a covering index with (uniqueID, customerID) on both tables to maximize efficiency
this is so not going to work unless you have "real" tables for the update. The "tblCustomers" may be a view or a subselect, but customerABC may not. You might need a more complicated JOIN to pull out a complex WHERE which might be otherwise hidden inside a subselect, if the original 'SELECT * FROM customerABC' was indeed a more complex query than a straight SELECT. What this boils down to is, MySQL needs a strong unique key to know what it needs to update, and it must be in a single table. To reliably update more than one table I think you need two UPDATEs inside a properly write-locked transaction.

Can we use FIND_IN_SET() function for multiple column in same table

NOTE : I tried many SF solution, but none work for me. This is bit challenging for, any help will be appreciated.
Below is my SQL-Fiddle link : http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/6daa20/9
I have tables below:
CREATE TABLE `tbl_pay_chat` (
nId int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
npayid int(11) NOT NULL,
nSender int(11) NOT NULL,
nTos varchar(255) binary DEFAULT NULL,
nCcs varchar(255) binary DEFAULT NULL,
sMailBody varchar(500) binary DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (nId)
)
ENGINE = INNODB,
CHARACTER SET utf8,
COLLATE utf8_bin;
INSERT INTO tbl_pay_chat
(nId,npayid,nSender,nTos,nCcs,sMailBody)
VALUES
(0,1,66,'3,10','98,133,10053','Hi this test maail'),
(0,1,66,'3,10','98,133,10053','test mail received');
_____________________________________________________________
CREATE TABLE `tbl_emp` (
empid int(11) NOT NULL,
fullname varchar(45) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (empid)
)
ENGINE = INNODB,
CHARACTER SET utf8,
COLLATE utf8_bin;
INSERT INTO `tbl_emp` (empid,fullname)
VALUES
(3, 'Rio'),
(10, 'Christ'),
(66, 'Jack'),
(98, 'Jude'),
(133, 'Mike'),
(10053, 'James');
What I want :
JOIN above two tables to get fullname in (nTos & nCcs) columns.
Also, I want total COUNT() of rows.
What I tried is below query but getting multiples time FULLNAME in 'nTos and nCcs column' also please suggest to find proper number of row count.
SELECT a.nId, a.npayid, e1.fullname AS nSender, sMailBody, GROUP_CONCAT(b.fullname ORDER BY b.empid)
AS nTos, GROUP_CONCAT(e.fullname ORDER BY e.empid) AS nCcs
FROM tbl_pay_chat a
INNER JOIN tbl_emp b
ON FIND_IN_SET(b.empid, a.nTos) > 0
INNER JOIN tbl_emp e
ON FIND_IN_SET(e.empid, a.nCcs) > 0
JOIN tbl_emp e1
ON e1.empid = a.nSender
GROUP BY a.nId ORDER BY a.nId DESC;
I hope I made my point clear. Please help.
You have a horrible data model. You should not be storing lists of ids in strings. Why? Here are some reasons:
Numbers should be stored as numbers not strings.
Relationships between tables should be declared using foreign key relationships.
SQL has pretty poor string manipulation capabilities.
The use of functions and type conversion in ON often prevents the use of indexes.
No doubt there are other good reasons. Your data model should be using properly declared junction tables for the n-m relationships.
That said, sometimes we are stuck with other people's really, really, really, really bad design decisions. There are some ways around this. I think the query that you want can be expressed as:
SELECT pc.nId, pc.npayid, s_e.fullname AS nSender, pc.sMailBody,
GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT to_e.fullname ORDER BY to_e.empid)
AS nTos,
GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT cc_e.fullname ORDER BY cc_e.empid) AS nCcs
FROM tbl_pay_chat pc INNER JOIN
tbl_emp to_e
ON FIND_IN_SET(to_e.empid, pc.nTos) > 0 INNER JOIN
tbl_emp cc_e
ON FIND_IN_SET(cc_e.empid, pc.nCcs) > 0 JOIN
tbl_emp s_e
ON s_e.empid = pc.nSender
GROUP BY pc.nId
ORDER BY pc.nId DESC;
Here is a db<>fiddle.

Query results take too long. Is there a better way to write this MySQL query?

I am trying to optimize a mysql query that works perfectly but is taking way too long. My inventory table is nearly 300,000 records (not too bad). I am not sure if using a subquery or join or additional index would speed up my results. I do have the district_id columns indexed in both the students and inventory tables.
Basically, the query below pulls all the inventory of all students in a teacher's roster. So it first has to search the students table to find which students are in the teacher's roster, then has to search the inventory table for each student. So if a teacher has 30+ students it can be a lot of searches through the inventory and each student can have 30+ pieces of inventory. Any advice would be helpful!
SELECT inventory.inventory_id, items.title, items.isbn, items.item_num,
items.price, conditions.condition_name, inventory.check_out,
inventory.check_in, inventory.student_id, inventory.teacher_id
FROM inventory, conditions, items, students
WHERE students.teacher_id = '$teacher_id'
AND students.district_id = $district_id
AND inventory.student_id = students.s_number
AND inventory.district_id = $district_id
AND inventory.item_id = items.item_id
AND items.consumable !=1
AND conditions.condition_id = inventory.condition_id
ORDER BY inventory.student_id, inventory.inventory_id
Here is the table structure:
CREATE TABLE `inventory` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL,
`inventory_id` varchar(10) CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`item_id` int(6) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`district_id` int(2) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`condition_id` int(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`check_out` date NOT NULL DEFAULT '0000-00-00',
`check_in` date NOT NULL DEFAULT '0000-00-00',
`student_id` varchar(10) CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`teacher_id` varchar(6) CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`acquisition_date` date NOT NULL DEFAULT '0000-00-00',
`notes` text CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT NULL
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
First you rewrite this to use explicit JOINs:
SELECT inventory.inventory_id,
items.title, items.isbn, items.item_num, items.price,
conditions.condition_name,
inventory.check_out, inventory.check_in,
inventory.student_id, inventory.teacher_id
FROM inventory
JOIN conditions ON (conditions.condition_id = inventory.condition_id)
JOIN items ON (inventory.item_id = items.item_id AND items.consumable != 1)
JOIN students ON (inventory.student_id = students.s_number)
WHERE students.teacher_id = '$teacher_id'
AND students.district_id = $district_id
AND inventory.district_id = $district_id
ORDER BY inventory.student_id, inventory.inventory_id
Then you examine the JOINs. For example this:
JOIN items ON (inventory.item_id = items.item_id AND items.consumable != 1)
means that the items table needs to be scanned on item_id and consumable, which might be a constant. It is always better to not use negative conditions if possible. But at the very least you index items on item_id (unless it's already the primary key, as is likely). If consumable can assume, say, values 0, 1, 2, 3, then you go:
JOIN items ON (inventory.item_id = items.item_id AND items.consumable IN (0, 2, 3))
and use CREATE INDEX to add an index on consumable.
You may notice that a few columns from inventory are always used in the other JOINs, and there are also some constant constraints.
So another useful index could be
CREATE INDEX ... ON inventory(district_id, student_id, item_id, condition_id)
Another useful index would be
ON students(teacher_id, district_id, student_id, s_number)
which allows immediately restricting the WHERE on the involved students, and retrieve the information required by the JOINs without ever loading the table, just using the index.
Switch to InnoDB! Some of what I am about to say is less efficient in InnoDB.
SELECT i.inventory_id,
items.title, items.isbn, items.item_num, items.price,
c.condition_name,
i.check_out, i.check_in, i.student_id, i.teacher_id
FROM inventory AS i
JOIN conditions AS c ON c.condition_id = i.condition_id
JOIN items ON i.item_id = items.item_id
JOIN students AS s ON i.student_id = s.s_number
WHERE s.teacher_id = '$teacher_id'
AND s.district_id = $district_id
AND i.student_id = s.s_number
AND i.district_id = $district_id
AND items.consumable != 1
ORDER BY i.student_id, i.inventory_id
To help the Optimizer if it would like to start with students:
students: INDEX(district_id, teacher_id, s_number)
Note: this is also "covering", thereby avoiding bouncing between index BTree and data BTree. (What is the PK of students? Please provide SHOW CREATE TABLE.)
If consuming the ORDER BY is better:
inventory: INDEX(district_id, student_id, inventory_id)
Also needed:
items: (item_id) -- probably already the PRIMARY KEY?
conditions: (condition_id) -- probably already the PRIMARY KEY?
Verify or add those 4 indexes. (The Optimizer will dynamically choose what to do.)

SQL alternative to sub-query in FROM

I have a table containing user to user messages. A conversation has all messages between two users. I am trying to get a list of all the different conversations and display only the last message sent in the listing.
I am able to do this with a SQL sub-query in FROM.
CREATE TABLE `messages` (
`id` bigint(20) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`from_user_id` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`to_user_id` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`type` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
`is_read` tinyint(1) NOT NULL,
`is_deleted` tinyint(1) NOT NULL,
`text` longtext COLLATE utf8_unicode_ci NOT NULL,
`heading` varchar(255) COLLATE utf8_unicode_ci DEFAULT NULL,
`created_at_utc` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`read_at_utc` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
);
SELECT * FROM
(SELECT * FROM `messages` WHERE TYPE = 1 AND
(from_user_id = 22 OR to_user_id = 22)
ORDER BY created_at_utc DESC
) tb
GROUP BY from_user_id, to_user_id;
SQL Fiddle:
http://www.sqlfiddle.com/#!2/845275/2
Is there a way to do this without a sub-query?
(writing a DQL which supports sub-queries only in 'IN')
You seem to be trying to get the last contents of messages to or from user 22 with type = 1. Your method is explicitly not guaranteed to work, because the extra columns (not in the group by) can come from arbitrary rows. As explained in the [documentation][1]:
MySQL extends the use of GROUP BY so that the select list can refer to
nonaggregated columns not named in the GROUP BY clause. This means
that the preceding query is legal in MySQL. You can use this feature
to get better performance by avoiding unnecessary column sorting and
grouping. However, this is useful primarily when all values in each
nonaggregated column not named in the GROUP BY are the same for each
group. The server is free to choose any value from each group, so
unless they are the same, the values chosen are indeterminate.
Furthermore, the selection of values from each group cannot be
influenced by adding an ORDER BY clause. Sorting of the result set
occurs after values have been chosen, and ORDER BY does not affect
which values within each group the server chooses.
The query that you want is more along the lines of this (assuming that you have an auto-incrementing id column for messages):
select m.*
from (select m.from_user_id, m.to_user_id, max(m.id) as max_id
from message m
where m.type = 1 and (m.from_user_id = 22 or m.to_user_id = 22)
) lm join
messages m
on lm.max_id = m.id;
Or this:
select m.*
from message m
where m.type = 1 and (m.from_user_id = 22 or m.to_user_id = 22) and
not exists (select 1
from messages m2
where m2.type = m.type and m2.from_user_id = m.from_user_id and
m2.to_user_id = m.to_user_id and
m2.created_at_utc > m.created_at_utc
);
For this latter query, an index on messages(type, from_user_id, to_user_id, created_at_utc) would help performance.
Since this is a rather specific type of data query which goes outside common ORM use cases, DQL isn't really fit for this - it's optimized for walking well-defined relationships.
For your case however Doctrine fully supports native SQL with result set mapping. Using a NativeQuery with ResultSetMapping like this you can easily use the subquery this problem requires, and still map the results on native Doctrine entities, allowing you to still profit from all caching, usability and performance advantages.
Samples found here.
If you mean to get all conversations and all their last messages, then a subquery is necessary.
SELECT a.* FROM messages a
INNER JOIN (
SELECT
MAX(created_at_utc) as max_created,
from_user_id,
to_user_id
FROM messages
GROUP BY from_user_id, to_user_id
) b ON a.created_at_utc = b.max_created
AND a.from_user_id = b.from_user_id
AND a.to_user_id = b.to_user_id
And you could append the where condition as you like.
THE SQL FIDDLE.
I don't think your original query was even doing this correctly. Not sure what the GROUP BY was being used for other than maybe try to only return a single (unpredictable) result.
Just add a limit clause:
SELECT * FROM `messages`
WHERE `type` = 1 AND
(`from_user_id` = 22 OR `to_user_id` = 22)
ORDER BY `created_at_utc` DESC
LIMIT 1
For optimum query performance you need indexes on the following fields:
type
from_user_id
to_user_id
created_at_utc

Using max function, group by and join

I have 3 tables:
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `disksinfo` (
`idx` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`hostinfo_idx` int(10) DEFAULT NULL,
`id` char(30) DEFAULT NULL,
`name` char(30) DEFAULT NULL,
`size` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`freespace` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`idx`)
)
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `hostinfo` (
`idx` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`host_idx` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`probetime` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`processor_load` tinyint(4) DEFAULT NULL,
`memory_total` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`memory_free` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`idx`)
)
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `hosts` (
`idx` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`name` char(30) DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY (`idx`)
)
Basicaly, hosts ist just fixed list of hostnames used in hostinfo table (hostinfo.host_idx = hosts.idx)
hostinfo is a table which is filled each few minutes with data from all hosts and in addition, for each hostinfo row at least one diskinfo row is created. Each diskinfo row contains informations about at least one disk (so, for some hosts there are 3-4 rows of diskinfo). diskinfo.hostinfo_idx = hostinfo.idx.
hostinfo.probetime is simply the time at which data snapshot was created.
What i want to perform now is to select last hostinfo (.probetime) for each particular distinct host (hostinfo.host_idx), while joing informations about disks (diskinfo table) and host names (hosts table)
I came with this:
SELECT hinfo.idx,
hinfo.host_idx,
hinfo.processor_load,
hinfo.memory_total,
hinfo.memory_free,
hnames.idx,
hnames.name,
disks.hostinfo_idx,
disks.id,
disks.name,
disks.size,
disks.freespace,
Max(hinfo.probetime)
FROM systeminfo.hostinfo AS hinfo
INNER JOIN systeminfo.hosts AS hnames
ON hnames.idx = hinfo.host_idx
INNER JOIN systeminfo.disksinfo AS disks
ON disks.hostinfo_idx = hinfo.idx
GROUP BY disks.id,
hnames.name
ORDER BY hnames.name,
disks.id
It seems to work! But, is it 100% correct? Is it optimal? Thanks for any tip!
It's not 100% correct, no.
Suppose you have this table:
x | y | z
-----------------
a b 1
a c 2
d e 1
d f 2
Now when you only group by x, the rows are collapsing and MySQL picks a random row from the collapsed ones. So you might get
x | y | z
-----------------
a b 2
d e 2
or this
x | y | z
-----------------
a c 2
d f 2
Or another combination, this is not determined. Each time you fire your query you might get a different result. The 2 in column z is always there, because of the MAX() function, but you won't necessarily get the corresponding row to it.
Other RDBMSs would actually do the same, but most forbid this by default (in can be forbidden in MySQL, too). You have two possibilities to fix this (actually there are more, but I'll restrict to two).
Either you put all columns you have in your SELECT clause which are not used in an aggregate function like SUM() or MAX() or whatever into the GROUP BY clause as well, like this:
SELECT hinfo.idx,
hinfo.host_idx,
hinfo.processor_load,
hinfo.memory_total,
hinfo.memory_free,
hnames.idx,
hnames.name,
disks.hostinfo_idx,
disks.id,
disks.name,
disks.size,
disks.freespace,
Max(hinfo.probetime)
FROM systeminfo.hostinfo AS hinfo
INNER JOIN systeminfo.hosts AS hnames
ON hnames.idx = hinfo.host_idx
INNER JOIN systeminfo.disksinfo AS disks
ON disks.hostinfo_idx = hinfo.idx
GROUP BY
hinfo.idx,
hinfo.host_idx,
hinfo.processor_load,
hinfo.memory_total,
hinfo.memory_free,
hnames.idx,
hnames.name,
disks.hostinfo_idx,
disks.id,
disks.name,
disks.size,
disks.freespace
ORDER BY hnames.name,
disks.id
Note that this query might get you a different result! I'm just focusing on the problem, that you might get wrong data to the row you think holds the MAX(hinfo.probetime).
Or you solve it like this (and this will get you what you want):
SELECT hinfo.idx,
hinfo.host_idx,
hinfo.processor_load,
hinfo.memory_total,
hinfo.memory_free,
hnames.idx,
hnames.name,
disks.hostinfo_idx,
disks.id,
disks.name,
disks.size,
disks.freespace,
hinfo.probetime
FROM systeminfo.hostinfo AS hinfo
INNER JOIN systeminfo.hosts AS hnames
ON hnames.idx = hinfo.host_idx
INNER JOIN systeminfo.disksinfo AS disks
ON disks.hostinfo_idx = hinfo.idx
WHERE hinfo.probetime = (SELECT MAX(probetime) FROM systeminfo.hostinfo AS hi
INNER JOIN systeminfo.hosts AS hn
ON hnames.idx = hinfo.host_idx
INNER JOIN systeminfo.disksinfo AS d
ON disks.hostinfo_idx = hinfo.idx
WHERE d.id = disks.id AND hn.name = hnames.name)
GROUP BY disks.id,
hnames.name
ORDER BY hnames.name,
disks.id
There's also a nice example in the manual about this: The Rows Holding the Group-wise Maximum of a Certain Column