Yves Sucaet wrote:
Hi Jack,
I'm expecting less than 10 records in the resulting set.
The BlockUnit table contains 337,253 records; the InteractionParts table
contains 279,953 records.
It takes currently 8.3 seconds to execute the query as I have it.
Erh, this is embarassing but I'm going to n
a MySQL database.
> >
> > - Original Message - From: "Micah Gersten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "YVES SUCAET" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DB] query
ces.
Can you help out rewriting the query using EXISTS syntax?
Thanks in advance,
Yves
- Original Message -
From: "Micah Gersten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DB] query optimization - DB
MySQL queries use 1 in
database.
>
> - Original Message - From: "Micah Gersten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "YVES SUCAET" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DB] query optimization
>
>
>> Other question is, what
Oh, sorry I forgot to mention this. It's a MySQL database.
- Original Message -
From: "Micah Gersten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "YVES SUCAET" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DB] query optimization
me help re-writing it with
EXISTS...
Thanks for the help so far,
Yves
- Original Message -
From: Jack van Zanen
To: Chris
Cc: YVES SUCAET ; php-db@lists.php.net
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DB] query optimization
If you can answer the other
Other question is, what DB is this for?
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
YVES SUCAET wrote:
> How could I rewrite the following query so it runs faster:
>
> select distinct location from blockunit where blockid in (
> select bu.blockid from b
If you can answer the other questions that would help as well
you can try rewriting using "exist" instead of "in"
But without the basic information like number of records expected and
explain plan it is very hard to come up with a better solution.
Brgds
Jack
2008/9/26 Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Jack van Zanen wrote:
Hi
If I am not mistaken,
the second part of the union contains all rows that are in the first part of
the union. just remove the first part.
Kind of.
The first part is a join, the second isn't.
I was going to suggest rewriting the subquery into a single:
where
ip.block
Hi
If I am not mistaken,
the second part of the union contains all rows that are in the first part of
the union. just remove the first part.
Also
What is the table sizes of the tables?
How many records are expected to come back from the union sub query?
How many records are expected to come
Micah Gersten wrote:
What indices do you have?
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
YVES SUCAET wrote:
How could I rewrite the following query so it runs faster:
select distinct location from blockunit where blockid in (
select bu.blockid fro
What indices do you have?
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
YVES SUCAET wrote:
> How could I rewrite the following query so it runs faster:
>
> select distinct location from blockunit where blockid in (
> select bu.blockid from blockunit bu in
12 matches
Mail list logo