select * from lkscore;query result(12 records)
| scoreid | chinese | math |
| 1 | 90 | 80 |
| 2 | 100 | 99 |
| 3 | 29 | 98 |
| 4 | 87 | 79 |
| 5 | 89 | 99 |
| 1 | 49 | 98 |
| 3 | 98 | 56 |
| 2 | 76 | 88 |
| 2 | 80 | 90 |
| 3 | 90 | 70 |
| 1 | 90 | 90 |
| 1 | 67 | 90 |
错误的SELECT
select scoreid,chinese,max(math) max_math from lkscore group by scoreid; |
query result(5 records)
| scoreid | chinese | max_math |
| 1 | 90 | 98 |
| 2 | 100 | 99 |
| 3 | 29 | 98 |
| 4 | 87 | 79 |
| 5 | 89 | 99 |
方法一:
select scoreid,chinese,math max_math from (select * from lkscore order by math desc) T group by scoreid; |
query result(5 records)
| scoreid | chinese | max_math |
| 1 | 49 | 98 |
| 2 | 100 | 99 |
| 3 | 29 | 98 |
| 4 | 87 | 79 |
| 5 | 89 | 99 |
方法二:
select * from lkscore a where a.math = (select max(math) from lkscore where scoreid = a.scoreid) order by scoreid asc; |
query result(5 records)
| scoreid | chinese | max_math |
| 1 | 49 | 98 |
| 2 | 100 | 99 |
| 3 | 29 | 98 |
| 4 | 87 | 79 |
| 5 | 89 | 99 |
这个也是用MAX函数,而且还用到了相关子查询。
我们来看一下这两个的效率如何:
explain |
query result(2 records)
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
| 1 | PRIMARY | <derived2> | ALL | (NULL) | (NULL) | (NULL) | (NULL) | 12 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 2 | DERIVED | lkscore | ALL | (NULL) | (NULL) | (NULL) | (NULL) | 12 | Using filesort |
很明显,有两个FULL TABLE SCAN。
|
query result(2 records)
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
| 1 | PRIMARY | a | index | (NULL) | fk_class | 5 | (NULL) | 12 | Using where |
| 2 | DEPENDENT SUBQUERY | lkscore | ref | fk_class | fk_class | 5 | a.scoreid | 1 | Using where |
第二个就用了KEY,子查询里只扫描了一跳记录。
很明显。在这种情况下第二个比第一个效率高点。
本文出自 “上帝,咱们不见不散!” 博客,转载请与作者联系!
推荐:MAX函数和GROUP BY 语句一起使用的一个误区http://yueliangdao0608.blog.51cto.com/397025/81278