我在我目前正在处理的系统中有一个重复出现的模式,例如,我需要选择在可能公司列表下拥有订单的所有用户。或者,如果存在标记此用户的记录,则需要选择用户。
我的users
表包含430,825条记录,所以这不应该是那么难以处理的。现在我关闭了,我有一个查询得到了我寻找的.047s执行时间,但是如果我再添加一个,它会变得很慢。
这是我当前的查询,快速查询:
select`UserID`
from`users`
where(`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
or`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`invoices`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1)`a`)
or`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`quoterequests`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1)`a`))
and(`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`userassociations`
where`_Email`='brian@yeet.com'
and`__Active`=1)`a`))
and(`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`usercustomerflags`
where`CustomerFlagID`in(10,27,17,1,2,3,4,5,6)
and`__Active`=1)`a`)
or not exists(select 1
from`usercustomerflags`
where`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`))
and`Deleted`=0
order by`DateTimeAdded`desc
limit 50;
(额外的select*from(...)
是因为这个https://stackoverflow.com/a/1434712/728236)
在中间,我通过电子邮件地址进一步拉动用户,同时检查其他相关表格,查找可能与此用户相关的电子邮件。比如,下一篇文章会在向客户发送报价时搜索用户,包括他们的CC地址。
select`UserID`
from`users`
where(`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
or`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`invoices`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1)`a`)
or`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`quoterequests`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1)`a`))
and(`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`userassociations`
where`_Email`='brian@yeet.com'
and`__Active`=1)`a`)
or`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`userquotesemails`
where`Email`='brian@yeet.com'
and`__Active`=1)`a`))
and(`UserID`in(select*
from(select`UserID`
from`usercustomerflags`
where`CustomerFlagID`in(10,27,17,1,2,3,4,5,6)
and`__Active`=1)`a`)
or not exists(select 1
from`usercustomerflags`
where`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`))
and`Deleted`=0
order by`DateTimeAdded`desc
limit 50;
我已经添加了备用表来搜索电子邮件,但现在查询需要3.016秒,这样会慢一些。看起来奇怪的是,当我构建这个查询时,最后一部分似乎是性能的转折点,这是什么原因?
第一个和第二个分别解释
+----+--------------------+-------------------+--+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------+------+-----------------------+---+-------+---------------------------------+
| 1 | PRIMARY | <subquery6> | | ALL | | | | | | 0.00 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 1 | PRIMARY | users | | eq_ref | PRIMARY,UserID_UNIQUE,fk_users_1_idx,users_Customers | PRIMARY | 144 | <subquery6>.UserID | 1 | 50.00 | Using where |
| 6 | MATERIALIZED | userassociations | | ref | userassociations_UserID,userassociations__Email | userassociations__Email | 1026 | const | 3 | 10.00 | Using where |
| 10 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | usercustomerflags | | ref | usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | 144 | sterling.users.UserID | 1 | 10.00 | Using where |
| 8 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | usercustomerflags | | index_subquery | usercustomerflags_CustomerFlagID_idx,usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | 144 | func | 1 | 4.95 | Using where |
| 4 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | quoterequests | | index_subquery | quoterequests_CompanyID,quoterequests_UserID,quoterequests__Latest,quoterequests_UserQuotes | quoterequests__Latest | 145 | func | 2 | 5.00 | Using where |
| 2 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | invoices | | index_subquery | Invoice_UserID_idx,Invoice_CompanyID_idx,invoices_SampleRequests,invoices_LateOrdersBubble | Invoice_UserID_idx | 145 | func | 1 | 3.33 | Using where |
+----+--------------------+-------------------+--+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------+------+-----------------------+---+-------+---------------------------------+
+----+--------------------+-------------------+--+-----+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+--------------------------------+------+-----------------------+--------+--------+-------------+
| 1 | PRIMARY | users | | ref | fk_users_1_idx,users_Customers | users_Customers | 4 | const | 227515 | 100.00 | Using where |
| 12 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | usercustomerflags | | ref | usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | 144 | sterling.users.UserID | 1 | 10.00 | Using where |
| 10 | SUBQUERY | usercustomerflags | | ALL | usercustomerflags_CustomerFlagID_idx,usercustomerflags_UserID_idx | | | | 3509 | 4.94 | Using where |
| 8 | SUBQUERY | userquotesemails | | ref | userquotesemails_Email__Active,userquotesemails_UserID | userquotesemails_Email__Active | 1027 | const,const | 1 | 100.00 | |
| 6 | SUBQUERY | userassociations | | ref | userassociations_UserID,userassociations__Email | userassociations__Email | 1026 | const | 3 | 10.00 | Using where |
| 4 | SUBQUERY | quoterequests | | ref | quoterequests_CompanyID,quoterequests_UserID,quoterequests__Latest,quoterequests_UserQuotes | quoterequests_CompanyID | 144 | const | 16702 | 10.00 | Using where |
| 2 | SUBQUERY | invoices | | ref | Invoice_UserID_idx,Invoice_CompanyID_idx,invoices_SampleRequests,invoices_LateOrdersBubble | Invoice_CompanyID_idx | 144 | const | 17678 | 10.00 | Using where |
+----+--------------------+-------------------+--+-----+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+--------------------------------+------+-----------------------+--------+--------+-------------+
另外,我尝试过使用连接,例如加入invoices
表等,但后来我遇到了每个invoice
或quoterequest
联接接收的重复用户行的问题,以及分组/不同&amp;在几分钟内,对结果数据的排序变得非常缓慢。
我也试过了#34;存在&#34;第一个查询的版本,由文档https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/subquery-optimization-with-exists.html建议,如此
select`UserID`
from`users`
where(`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
or exists(select 1
from`invoices`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`)
or exists(select 1
from`quoterequests`
where`CompanyID`in('3e55d1bb-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8')
and`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`))
and(exists(select 1
from`userassociations`
where`_Email`='brian@yeet.com'
and`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`))
and(exists(select 1
from`usercustomerflags`
where`CustomerFlagID`in(10,27,17,1,2,3,4,5,6)
and`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`)
or not exists(select 1
from`usercustomerflags`
where`__Active`=1
and`users`.`UserID`=`UserID`))
and`Deleted`=0
order by`DateTimeAdded`desc
limit 50;
但这让我达到5.516秒,所以这绝对不是正确的方向。
以我尝试的方式选择数据的最有效方法是什么?或者我是否需要重新构建一些表格以获得我正在寻找的性能?
我认为我已经分离出了最小的子问题和瓶颈。这是我的轻量级查询
select`users`.`UserID`,`users`.`_Customer`
from`users`
left join`userassociations`on`userassociations`.`UserID`=`users`.`UserID`
and`userassociations`.`__Active`=1
where(`users`.`Email`='brian@stumpyinc.com'
or`userassociations`.`_Email`='brian@stumpyinc.com')
and`users`.`Deleted`=0
order by`users`.`DateTimeAdded`desc
limit 50;
和解释
+---+--------+------------------+--+-----+--------------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------+--------+-------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | users | | ref | users_getemail_INDEX,unify_email_INDEX,users_Customers | users_Customers | 4 | const | 221463 | 100.00 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | userassociations | | ref | userassociations_UserID | userassociations_UserID | 144 | sterling.users.UserID | 1 | 100.00 | Using where |
+---+--------+------------------+--+-----+--------------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------+--------+-------------+
此查询大约需要1.5秒才能执行
CREATE TABLE `users` (
`UserID` char(36) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci NOT NULL DEFAULT '',
...
`Email` varchar(255) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci DEFAULT NULL,
...
`DateTimeAdded` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
...
`Deleted` int(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
...
`_LatestInvoiceDateTimeAdded` datetime DEFAULT NULL,
`_InvoiceCount` int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
`_Customer` varchar(512) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci DEFAULT NULL,
...
PRIMARY KEY (`UserID`),
UNIQUE KEY `UserID_UNIQUE` (`UserID`),
...
KEY `users_getemail_INDEX` (`Email`(191),`_InvoiceCount`,`_LatestInvoiceDateTimeAdded`,`DateTimeAdded`),
KEY `unify_email_INDEX` (`Email`(191),`UserID`),
...
KEY `users_Customers` (`Deleted`,`DateTimeAdded`),
...
KEY `users_DateTimeAdded` (`DateTimeAdded`,`UserID`),
FULLTEXT KEY `users_FULLTEXT__Customer` (`_Customer`),
...
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8mb4 COLLATE=utf8mb4_unicode_ci;
CREATE TABLE `userassociations` (
`UserAssociationID` binary(16) NOT NULL,
`UserID` char(36) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci NOT NULL,
`AssociatedUserID` char(36) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci NOT NULL,
`_Email` varchar(256) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci NOT NULL,
`__UserID` char(36) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci DEFAULT NULL,
`__Active` tinyint(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT '1',
`__Added` timestamp(6) NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(6),
`__Updated` timestamp(6) NULL DEFAULT NULL ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(6),
PRIMARY KEY (`UserAssociationID`),
KEY `userassociations_UserID` (`UserID`),
KEY `userassociations_AssociatedUserID` (`AssociatedUserID`),
KEY `userassociations___UserID` (`__UserID`),
KEY `userassociations__Email` (`_Email`),
CONSTRAINT `userassociations_AssociatedUserID` FOREIGN KEY (`AssociatedUserID`) REFERENCES `users` (`UserID`) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION,
CONSTRAINT `userassociations_UserID` FOREIGN KEY (`UserID`) REFERENCES `users` (`UserID`) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION,
CONSTRAINT `userassociations___UserID` FOREIGN KEY (`__UserID`) REFERENCES `users` (`UserID`) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8mb4 COLLATE=utf8mb4_unicode_ci
嗯......所以看起来它确实有效,但是我发现了一对它看起来效率不高的表,这是我的users
和{ {1}}表。
我有这些索引:
invoices
和查询
users: INDEX(`CompanyID`, `Deleted`, `DateTimeAdded`)
invoices: INDEX(`UserID`, `__Active`)
invoices: INDEX(`CompanyID`)
users: INDEX(`UserID`, `Deleted`)
这个查询单独需要0.3秒,这对我来说感觉很慢,因为它没有充分利用索引,特别是因为select`users`.`UserID`,`users`.`DateTimeAdded`
from`users`
join`invoices`on`invoices`.`UserID`=`users`.`UserID`
and`invoices`.`__Active`=1
where`invoices`.`CompanyID`='3e55c8b4-d8b6-11e4-b38f-b8ca3a83b4c8'
and`users`.`Deleted`=0
order by`DateTimeAdded`desc
limit 200;
只有430,997行和users
有194,180,这看起来应该是一个非常简单的查询。
编辑:实际上它比这更糟糕,如果给出的CompanyID只包含~4行,则此查询需要3.5秒
invoices
答案 0 :(得分:1)
对于那个较小的问题:
( select u.`UserID`, u.`_Customer`, u.DateTimeAdded
from `users` AS u
where u.`Email` = 'brian@stumpyinc.com'
and u.`Deleted` = 0
AND EXISTS ( SELECT * FROM `userassociations`
WHERE UserId = u.UserID
AND __Active = 1 )
order by u.`DateTimeAdded` desc
limit 50
)
UNION DISTINCT
( select u.`UserID`, u.`_Customer`, u.DateTimeAdded
from `users` AS u
JOIN `userassociations` AS ua
ON ua.`UserID` = u.`UserID`
and ua.`__Active` = 1
where ua.`_Email` = 'brian@stumpyinc.com'
and u.`Deleted`=0
order by u.`DateTimeAdded` desc
limit 50
)
order by `DateTimeAdded` desc
limit 50
需要这些:
u: INDEX(Email, Deleted, DateTimeAdded) -- date last
ua: INDEX(UserId, __Active) -- either order
ua: INDEX(_Email)
u: INDEX(UserID, Deleted)
(如果您遇到语法错误,请告诉我。如果速度过慢,请提供EXPLAIN
。)
索引前缀(Email(191)
)通常没用。如果它,摆脱它。以下是5种避免它的方法:http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/limits#767_limit_in_innodb_indexes
PK是一个UNIQUE键,所以摆脱第二个:
PRIMARY KEY (`UserID`),
UNIQUE KEY `UserID_UNIQUE` (`UserID`),
闻起来像UUID;使用ascii(ascii_general_ci),而不是utf8mb4:
... char(36) COLLATE utf8mb4_unicode_ci
INT(1)
占用4个字节;使用TINYINT
作为标志。
答案 1 :(得分:0)
非常确定您可以使用 public ImageView dealer_Card1, dealer_Card2, dealer_Card3, dealer_Card4, dealer_Card5;
public ImageView player_Card1, player_Card2, player_Card3, player_Card4, player_Card5;
public void btn_Stand_Click() {
do {
dealer_Call();
calculate_Dealer_Score();
if (dealer_Score > 21) {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
if (dealer_Card_Array[i] == 'A' && dealer_Score_Count[i] == 11) {
dealer_Score_Count[i] = 1;
break;
}
}
calculate_Dealer_Score();
}
} while (dealer_Score < 17 && dealer_Score <= player_Score && dealer_Card_Number < 5);
results();
}
public void btn_Stand(View view) {
do {
dealer_Call();
calculate_Dealer_Score();
if (dealer_Score > 21) {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
if (dealer_Card_Array[i] == 'A' && dealer_Score_Count[i] == 11) {
dealer_Score_Count[i] = 1;
break;
}
}
calculate_Dealer_Score();
}
} while (dealer_Score < 17 && dealer_Score <= player_Score && dealer_Card_Number < 5);
if (player_Score == 21) {
black_Jack();
} else if (dealer_Score == 21) {
dealer_black_Jack();
} else if (dealer_Score > 21) {
total = total + (bet * 2);
Toast toast = Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Dealer Bust! You won!", Toast.LENGTH_LONG);
toast.setGravity(Gravity.CENTER, 0, 0);
toast.show();
disable_Buttons();
alert_Box();
} else results();
}
private void card_Image_Switcher() {
dealer_Card1.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
dealer_Card2.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
dealer_Card3.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
dealer_Card4.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
dealer_Card5.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
player_Card1.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
player_Card2.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
player_Card3.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
player_Card4.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
player_Card5.setImageResource(R.drawable.cardback);
}
和WHERE
的组合替换INNER
子句中的所有子查询。试试这个:
LEFT JOIN