区别与组别

Question

我有两张这样的桌子.'order'表有21886行.

CREATE TABLE `order` (
  `id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL,
  `reg_date` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
  PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
  KEY `idx_reg_date` (`reg_date`),
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci


CREATE TABLE `order_detail_products` (
  `id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
  `order_id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL,
  `order_detail_id` int(11) NOT NULL,
  `prod_id` int(11) NOT NULL,
  PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
  KEY `idx_order_detail_id` (`order_detail_id`,`prod_id`),
  KEY `idx_order_id` (`order_id`,`order_detail_id`,`prod_id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=572375 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci

我的问题在这里.

MariaDB [test]> explain
    -> SELECT DISTINCT A.id
    -> FROM order A
    -> JOIN order_detail_products B ON A.id = B.order_id
    -> ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC LIMIT 100, 30;
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
| id   | select_type | table | type  | possible_keys | key          | key_len | ref               | rows  | Extra                                        |
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
|    1 | SIMPLE      | A     | index | PRIMARY       | idx_reg_date | 8       | NULL              | 22151 | Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort |
|    1 | SIMPLE      | B     | ref   | idx_order_id  | idx_order_id | 8       | bom_20140804.A.id |     2 | Using index; Distinct                        |
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

MariaDB [test]> explain
    -> SELECT A.id
    -> FROM order A
    -> JOIN order_detail_products B ON A.id = B.order_id
    -> GROUP BY A.id
    -> ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC LIMIT 100, 30;
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+------+------------------------------+
| id   | select_type | table | type  | possible_keys | key          | key_len | ref               | rows | Extra                        |
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+------+------------------------------+
|    1 | SIMPLE      | A     | index | PRIMARY       | idx_reg_date | 8       | NULL              |   65 | Using index; Using temporary |
|    1 | SIMPLE      | B     | ref   | idx_order_id  | idx_order_id | 8       | bom_20140804.A.id |    2 | Using index                  |
+------+-------------+-------+-------+---------------+--------------+---------+-------------------+------+------------------------------+

上面列出的是,两个查询返回相同的结果但不同的结果太慢(解释太多行).有什么不同？

Answer 1

通常建议使用DISTINCT而不是GROUP BY，因为那是您真正想要的，并让优化器选择“最佳”执行计划。然而，没有一个优化器是完美的。使用DISTINCT优化器可以让执行计划有更多的选择。但这也意味着它有更多的选择来选择糟糕的计划。

您写道查询DISTINCT“慢”，但没有告诉任何数字。在我的测试中（ MariaDB 10.0.19和10.3.13上的行数是其 10 倍），DISTINCT查询速度（仅）慢了 25%（562ms/453ms）。结果EXPLAIN一点帮助都没有。甚至是“撒谎”。使用LIMIT 100, 30它需要读取至少 130 行（这就是我EXPLAIN实际显示的GROUP BY），但它显示了 65 行。

我无法解释执行时间上 25% 的差异，但似乎引擎在任何情况下都会进行完整的表/索引扫描，并对结果进行排序，然后才能跳过 100 行并选择 30 行。

最好的计划可能是：

• 按降序从idx_reg_date索引（表）中逐行读取行A
• idx_order_id查看索引（表B）中是否有匹配项
• 跳过 100 个匹配行
• 发送 30 个匹配行
• 出口

如果其中大约 10% 的行在 中A没有匹配项B，则此计划将从 中读取类似 143 行的内容A。

为了以某种方式强制实施这个计划，我能做的最好的事情是：

SELECT A.id
FROM `order` A
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM order_detail_products B WHERE A.id = B.order_id)
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30
OFFSET 100

此查询在 156 毫秒内返回相同的结果（比 快 3 倍GROUP BY）。但这仍然太慢。它可能仍在读取 table 中的所有行A。

我们可以证明通过一个“小”子查询技巧可以存在更好的计划：

SELECT A.id
FROM (
    SELECT id, reg_date
    FROM `order`
    ORDER BY reg_date DESC
    LIMIT 1000
) A
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM order_detail_products B WHERE A.id = B.order_id)
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30
OFFSET 100

此查询在“无时间”（~ 0 毫秒）内执行，并在我的测试数据上返回相同的结果。虽然它不是 100% 可靠，但它表明优化器做得不好。

那么我的结论是什么：

• 优化器并不总是做得最好，有时需要帮助
• 即使我们知道“最好的计划”，我们也不能总是执行它
• DISTINCT并不总是比GROUP BY
• 当没有索引可以用于所有子句时 - 事情会变得非常棘手

测试模式和虚拟数据：

drop table if exists `order`;
CREATE TABLE `order` (
  `id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
  `reg_date` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,
  PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
  KEY `idx_reg_date` (`reg_date`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci;

insert into `order`(reg_date)
    select from_unixtime(floor(rand(1) * 1000000000)) as reg_date
    from information_schema.COLUMNS a
       , information_schema.COLUMNS b
    limit 218860;

drop table if exists `order_detail_products`;
CREATE TABLE `order_detail_products` (
  `id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
  `order_id` bigint(20) unsigned NOT NULL,
  `order_detail_id` int(11) NOT NULL,
  `prod_id` int(11) NOT NULL,
  PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
  KEY `idx_order_detail_id` (`order_detail_id`,`prod_id`),
  KEY `idx_order_id` (`order_id`,`order_detail_id`,`prod_id`)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=1 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci;

insert into order_detail_products(id, order_id, order_detail_id, prod_id)
    select null as id
    , floor(rand(2)*218860)+1 as order_id
    , 0 as order_detail_id
    , 0 as prod_id
    from information_schema.COLUMNS a
       , information_schema.COLUMNS b
    limit 437320;

查询：

SELECT DISTINCT A.id
FROM `order` A
JOIN order_detail_products B ON A.id = B.order_id
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30 OFFSET 100;
-- 562 ms

SELECT A.id
FROM `order` A
JOIN order_detail_products B ON A.id = B.order_id
GROUP BY A.id
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30 OFFSET 100;
-- 453 ms

SELECT A.id
FROM `order` A
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM order_detail_products B WHERE A.id = B.order_id)
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30 OFFSET 100;
-- 156 ms

SELECT A.id
FROM (
    SELECT id, reg_date
    FROM `order`
    ORDER BY reg_date DESC
    LIMIT 1000
) A
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM order_detail_products B WHERE A.id = B.order_id)
ORDER BY A.reg_date DESC
LIMIT 30 OFFSET 100;
-- ~ 0 ms