Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Bryan Heitman
> To: "'Bryan Heitman'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Sergio Salvi'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 2:49 PM Subject: RE: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM Bryan, Select count(*) is basically a different query th

RE: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Donny Simonton
nything before that. Just a theory. Donny > -Original Message- > From: Bryan Heitman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 2:02 PM > To: Sergio Salvi > Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM > &g

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Benoit St-Jean
Bryan Heitman wrote: I am experiencing extreme slowness performing a query in which 2 rows are returned hanging in the "sending data" status. Performing an index only query such as SELECT COUNT(*) is extremely quick so I know the only extra step is retrieving the data from the MYD. I am looking

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Jeff Smelser
On Thursday 23 December 2004 02:01 pm, Bryan Heitman wrote: > Hi Sergio, > > All of your suggestions deal with key optimization, I do not believe I have > a key issue here. Remember that select count(*), an index-only query > returns in .06 seconds which is very quick. The real question, is why d

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Bryan Heitman
itman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:01 PM Subject: Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Bryan Heitman wrote: My mistake! Here you go: Ok, no prob :) CREATE TABLE `matrix` ( `WordID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default &

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Sergio Salvi
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Bryan Heitman wrote: > My mistake! Here you go: Ok, no prob :) > > CREATE TABLE `matrix` ( > `WordID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default '0', > `LocationID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default '0', > `Position` enum('Body','From','Subject','To','Mailbox','File') NOT NU

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Bryan Heitman
e`), KEY `myKey2` (`LocationID`) ) TYPE=MyISAM MAX_ROWS=10 AVG_ROW_LENGTH=300 DATA DIRECTORY='/home/imap/fuse3.disk2/SQL/search/' - Original Message - From: "Sergio Salvi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bryan Heitman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc:

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Sergio Salvi
Bryan, Can you send the output of "show create table matrix"? You've just sent the "location" table output, but your select command refers to a table called "matrix". []s, Sergio. On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Bryan Heitman wrote: > I am experiencing extreme slowness performing a query in which 2 rows

Re: Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Bryan Heitman
PROTECTED]> To: "Bryan Heitman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:00 AM Subject: Re: Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM Bryan Heitman,您好！ Because it should scan through all the table to get all records,so it takes so a long time,i think. =

Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-23 Thread Bryan Heitman
ED]> To: "leo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:37 AM Subject: Re: scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM Thanks Leo, However, remember that the key returns quickly on index-only queries, so the conditions in the WHERE are not the problem. I want to k

scanning 2 rows slow index fast 26GB MyISAM

2004-12-22 Thread Bryan Heitman
I am experiencing extreme slowness performing a query in which 2 rows are returned hanging in the "sending data" status. Performing an index only query such as SELECT COUNT(*) is extremely quick so I know the only extra step is retrieving the data from the MYD. I am looking for thoughts on why