Hello.
It is a hard task to answer if we don't see your queries and tables' structure. Sometimes several small queries could be faster than a big one. For example, often, query with subqueries or union runs slower than few queries which use temporary tables. "Octavian Rasnita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a big query that involves searching in more tables, and I think this > might be slower than creating more smaller queries. What do you think, is > this true generally? > > The query searches in a big table but it also counts the number of records > from other 2 tables based on a criteria, and usually the result is a big > number of records, but the final result is limited using "limit 0,30". > > So I am wondering... > Could it work faster if I won't count(*) the number of records in those 2 > tables, but get the result (only 30 records), then for each separate record > use a separate query that gets that number? > > I don't know, could 31 queries work faster than a single bigger and complex > query? > > Thank you. > > Teddy > > > -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.NET http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ ____ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Gleb Paharenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.NET <___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
