A:
select * from t1 where f1 = 20;
B:
select * from t1 where f1 = 30;
如果f1的值刚好频繁更新的值为30,并且没有达到MySQL自动更新cardinality值的临界值或者说用户设置了手动更新又或者用户减少了sample page等等,那么对这两条语句来说,可能不准确的就是B了。
这里顺带说下,MySQL提供了自动更新和手动更新表cardinality值的方法,因篇幅有限,需要的可以查阅手册。
那回到正题上,MySQL 8.0 带来了几个HINT,我今天就举个index_merge的例子。
示例表结构:
mysql> desc t1;+------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |+------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+| id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment || rank1 | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | || rank2 | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | || log_time | datetime | YES | MUL | NULL | || prefix_uid | varchar(100) | YES | | NULL | || desc1 | text | YES | | NULL | || rank3 | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | |+------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+7 rows in set (0.00 sec)
表记录数:
mysql> select count(*) from t1;+----------+| count(*) |+----------+| 32768 |+----------+1 row in set (0.01 sec)
这里我们两条经典的SQL:
SQL C:
select * from t1 where rank1 = 1 or rank2 = 2 or rank3 = 2;
SQL D:
select * from t1 where rank1 =100 and rank2 =100 and rank3 =100;
表t1实际上在rank1,rank2,rank3三列上分别有一个二级索引。
那我们来看SQL C的查询计划。
显然,没有用到任何索引,扫描的行数为32034,cost为3243.65。
mysql> explain format=json select * from t1 where rank1 =1 or rank2 = 2 or rank3 = 2\G*************************** 1. row ***************************EXPLAIN: { "query_block": { "select_id": 1, "cost_info": { "query_cost": "3243.65" }, "table": { "table_name": "t1", "access_type": "ALL", "possible_keys": [ "idx_rank1", "idx_rank2", "idx_rank3" ], "rows_examined_per_scan": 32034, "rows_produced_per_join": 115, "filtered": "0.36", "cost_info": { "read_cost": "3232.07", "eval_cost": "11.58", "prefix_cost": "3243.65", "data_read_per_join": "49K" }, "used_columns": [ "id", "rank1", "rank2", "log_time", "prefix_uid", "desc1", "rank3" ], "attached_condition": "((`ytt`.`t1`.`rank1` = 1) or (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank2` = 2) or (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank3` = 2))" } }}1 row in set, 1 warning (0.00 sec)
我们加上hint给相同的查询,再次看看查询计划。
这个时候用到了index_merge,union了三个列。扫描的行数为1103,cost为441.09,明显比之前的快了好几倍。
mysql> explain format=json select /*+ index_merge(t1) */ * from t1 where rank1 =1 or rank2 = 2 or rank3 = 2\G*************************** 1. row ***************************EXPLAIN: { "query_block": { "select_id": 1, "cost_info": { "query_cost": "441.09" }, "table": { "table_name": "t1", "access_type": "index_merge", "possible_keys": [ "idx_rank1", "idx_rank2", "idx_rank3" ], "key": "union(idx_rank1,idx_rank2,idx_rank3)", "key_length": "5,5,5", "rows_examined_per_scan": 1103, "rows_produced_per_join": 1103, "filtered": "100.00", "cost_info": { "read_cost": "330.79", "eval_cost": "110.30", "prefix_cost": "441.09", "data_read_per_join": "473K" }, "used_columns": [ "id", "rank1", "rank2", "log_time", "prefix_uid", "desc1", "rank3" ], "attached_condition": "((`ytt`.`t1`.`rank1` = 1) or (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank2` = 2) or (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank3` = 2))" } }}1 row in set, 1 warning (0.00 sec)
我们再看下SQL D的计划:
不加HINT,
mysql> explain format=json select * from t1 where rank1 =100 and rank2 =100 and rank3 =100\G*************************** 1. row ***************************EXPLAIN: { "query_block": { "select_id": 1, "cost_info": { "query_cost": "534.34" }, "table": { "table_name": "t1", "access_type": "ref", "possible_keys": [ "idx_rank1", "idx_rank2", "idx_rank3" ], "key": "idx_rank1", "used_key_parts": [ "rank1" ], "key_length": "5", "ref": [ "const" ], "rows_examined_per_scan": 555, "rows_produced_per_join": 0, "filtered": "0.07", "cost_info": { "read_cost": "478.84", "eval_cost": "0.04", "prefix_cost": "534.34", "data_read_per_join": "176" }, "used_columns": [ "id", "rank1", "rank2", "log_time", "prefix_uid", "desc1", "rank3" ], "attached_condition": "((`ytt`.`t1`.`rank3` = 100) and (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank2` = 100))" } }}1 row in set, 1 warning (0.00 sec)
加了HINT,
mysql> explain format=json select /*+ index_merge(t1)*/ * from t1 where rank1 =100 and rank2 =100 and rank3 =100\G*************************** 1. row ***************************EXPLAIN: { "query_block": { "select_id": 1, "cost_info": { "query_cost": "5.23" }, "table": { "table_name": "t1", "access_type": "index_merge", "possible_keys": [ "idx_rank1", "idx_rank2", "idx_rank3" ], "key": "intersect(idx_rank1,idx_rank2,idx_rank3)", "key_length": "5,5,5", "rows_examined_per_scan": 1, "rows_produced_per_join": 1, "filtered": "100.00", "cost_info": { "read_cost": "5.13", "eval_cost": "0.10", "prefix_cost": "5.23", "data_read_per_join": "440" }, "used_columns": [ "id", "rank1", "rank2", "log_time", "prefix_uid", "desc1", "rank3" ], "attached_condition": "((`ytt`.`t1`.`rank3` = 100) and (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank2` = 100) and (`ytt`.`t1`.`rank1` = 100))" } }}1 row in set, 1 warning (0.00 sec)
对比下以上两个,加了HINT的比不加HINT的cost小了100倍。
总结下,就是说表的cardinality值影响这张的查询计划,如果这个值没有正常更新的话,就需要手工加HINT了。相信MySQL未来的版本会带来更多的HINT。