【发布时间】:2016-03-13 10:20:34
【问题描述】:
我正在使用Postgresql-9.2 version、Windows 7 64 bit、RAM 6GB。这是一个 Java 企业项目。
我必须在我的页面中显示订单相关信息。通过左连接将三个表组合在一起。
表格:
- TV_HD(389772 行)
- TV_SNAPSHOT(1564756 行)
- TD_MAKKA(419298 行)
左连接 3 个表后,查询给出487252。也会一天天增加。
表关系:
- TV_HD 包含与 TV_SNAPSHOT 的“一对多”关系
- TV_HD 包含与 TD_MAKKA 的“一对多”关系
为了更好地理解,我现在用 sql 查询给出一个图形视图
SELECT * FROM tv_hd where urino = 1630799
SELECT * FROM tv_snapshot where urino = 1630799
SELECT * FROM td_makka where urino = 1630799 此查询运行大约 90 秒。如何提高查询性能?
我也考虑过索引。但据我所知,当我们想从表中获取 2%-4% 的数据时,实际上会使用索引。但就我而言,我需要这 3 个表中的所有数据。
这里是查询:
SELECT count(*)
FROM (SELECT HD.URINO
FROM
TV_HD HD
LEFT JOIN TV_SNAPSHOT T ON (HD.URINO = T.URINO AND HD.TCODE = T.TCODE AND T.DELFLG = 0 AND T.SYUBETSU = 1)
LEFT JOIN TV_SNAPSHOT T_SQ
ON (HD.URINO = T_SQ.URINO AND HD.SQCODE = T_SQ.TCODE AND T_SQ.DELFLG = 0 AND T_SQ.SYUBETSU = 3)
LEFT JOIN (SELECT N.URINO
FROM
TD_MAKKA N
WHERE
N.UPDATETIME IN (
SELECT MIN(NMIN.UPDATETIME)
FROM
TD_MAKKA NMIN
WHERE
N.URINO = NMIN.URINO
AND
NMIN.TORIKESHIFLG <> -1
)
) NYUMIN
ON (HD.URINO = NYUMIN.URINO)
LEFT JOIN
(
SELECT
NSUM.URINO,
SUM(COALESCE(NSUM.NYUKIN, 0)) NYUKIN,
SUM(COALESCE(NSUM.NYUKIN, 0)) + SUM(COALESCE(NSUM.TESU, 0)) + SUM(COALESCE(NSUM.SOTA, 0)) SUMNYUKIN
FROM
TD_MAKKA NSUM
GROUP BY
URINO
) NYUSUM
ON (HD.URINO = NYUSUM.URINO)
LEFT JOIN
(
SELECT N.URINO
FROM
TD_MAKKA N
WHERE
UPDATETIME = (
SELECT MAX(UPDATETIME)
FROM
TD_MAKKA NMAX
WHERE
N.URINO = NMAX.URINO
AND
NMAX.TORIKESHIFLG <> -1
)
) NYUMAX
ON (HD.URINO = NYUMAX.URINO)
WHERE ((HD.URIBRUI <> '1') OR (HD.URIBRUI = '1' AND T_SQ.NYUKOBEFLG = '-1'))
ORDER BY
HD.URINO DESC
) COUNT_
这是EXPLAIN ANALYZE的结果
Aggregate (cost=7246861.21..7246861.22 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=69549.159..69549.159 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Merge Left Join (cost=7240188.92..7242117.36 rows=379508 width=6) (actual time=68602.689..69510.563 rows=487252 loops=1)
Merge Cond: (hd.urino = n.urino)
-> Sort (cost=3727299.33..3728248.10 rows=379508 width=6) (actual time=62160.072..62557.132 rows=420036 loops=1)
Sort Key: hd.urino
Sort Method: external merge Disk: 6984kB
-> Hash Right Join (cost=169264.26..3686940.26 rows=379508 width=6) (actual time=54796.930..60172.248 rows=420036 loops=1)
Hash Cond: (n.urino = hd.urino)
-> Seq Scan on td_makka n (cost=0.00..3511201.36 rows=209673 width=6) (actual time=24.326..4640.020 rows=419143 loops=1)
Filter: (SubPlan 1)
Rows Removed by Filter: 155
SubPlan 1
-> Aggregate (cost=8.33..8.34 rows=1 width=23) (actual time=0.009..0.009 rows=1 loops=419298)
-> Index Scan using idx_td_makka on td_makka nmin (cost=0.00..8.33 rows=1 width=23) (actual time=0.006..0.007 rows=1 loops=419298)
Index Cond: (n.urino = urino)
Filter: (torikeshiflg <> (-1)::numeric)
Rows Removed by Filter: 0
-> Hash (cost=163037.41..163037.41 rows=379508 width=6) (actual time=54771.078..54771.078 rows=386428 loops=1)
Buckets: 4096 Batches: 16 Memory Usage: 737kB
-> Hash Right Join (cost=75799.55..163037.41 rows=379508 width=6) (actual time=51599.167..54605.901 rows=386428 loops=1)
Hash Cond: ((t_sq.urino = hd.urino) AND (t_sq.tcode = hd.sqcode))
Filter: ((hd.uribrui <> '1'::bpchar) OR ((hd.uribrui = '1'::bpchar) AND (t_sq.nyukobeflg = (-1)::numeric)))
Rows Removed by Filter: 3344
-> Seq Scan on tv_snapshot t_sq (cost=0.00..73705.42 rows=385577 width=15) (actual time=0.053..2002.953 rows=389983 loops=1)
Filter: ((delflg = 0::numeric) AND (syubetsu = 3::numeric))
Rows Removed by Filter: 1174773
-> Hash (cost=68048.99..68048.99 rows=389771 width=14) (actual time=51596.055..51596.055 rows=389772 loops=1)
Buckets: 4096 Batches: 16 Memory Usage: 960kB
-> Hash Right Join (cost=21125.85..68048.99 rows=389771 width=14) (actual time=579.405..51348.270 rows=389772 loops=1)
Hash Cond: (nyusum.urino = hd.urino)
-> Subquery Scan on nyusum (cost=0.00..35839.52 rows=365638 width=6) (actual time=17.435..49996.674 rows=385537 loops=1)
-> GroupAggregate (cost=0.00..32183.14 rows=365638 width=34) (actual time=17.430..49871.702 rows=385537 loops=1)
-> Index Scan using idx_td_makka on td_makka nsum (cost=0.00..21456.76 rows=419345 width=34) (actual time=0.017..48357.702 rows=419298 loops=1)
-> Hash (cost=13969.71..13969.71 rows=389771 width=20) (actual time=491.549..491.549 rows=389772 loops=1)
Buckets: 4096 Batches: 32 Memory Usage: 567kB
-> Seq Scan on tv_hd hd (cost=0.00..13969.71 rows=389771 width=20) (actual time=0.052..242.415 rows=389772 loops=1)
-> Sort (cost=3512889.60..3512894.84 rows=2097 width=6) (actual time=6442.600..6541.728 rows=486359 loops=1)
Sort Key: n.urino
Sort Method: external sort Disk: 8600kB
-> Seq Scan on td_makka n (cost=0.00..3512773.90 rows=2097 width=6) (actual time=0.135..4053.116 rows=419143 loops=1)
Filter: ((updatetime)::text = (SubPlan 2))
Rows Removed by Filter: 155
SubPlan 2
-> Aggregate (cost=8.33..8.34 rows=1 width=23) (actual time=0.008..0.008 rows=1 loops=419298)
-> Index Scan using idx_td_makka on td_makka nmax (cost=0.00..8.33 rows=1 width=23) (actual time=0.005..0.006 rows=1 loops=419298)
Index Cond: (n.urino = urino)
Filter: (torikeshiflg <> (-1)::numeric)
Rows Removed by Filter: 0
Total runtime: 69575.139 ms
这里是解释分析结果详情:
【问题讨论】:
-
wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Slow_Query_Questions + 删除查询中的所有杂乱,如果您所做的只是计数,则不需要所有这些列。修复格式。另请注意,索引也用于连接,特别是因为您只是在此处进行计数而不是选择所有值。
-
让我们从这里开始:
EXPLAIN ANALYZE <long_query_here>。让我们知道分析返回的内容,然后我们可以讨论优化它。如果不清楚,就很难说什么需要解决。 -
@Makoto 我添加了“解释分析”信息并更新了查询。请检查并给我一些建议来平息
-
如果您还告诉我们这些表格之间的关系,那会有所帮助。从我现在看到的情况来看,这些顺序扫描正在扼杀你的表现;这意味着至少,
urino列将从索引中受益。 -
您添加的信息并未告诉我们这些表格之间的关系;为什么加入这些列是有意义的。
标签: java hibernate postgresql