ouping.State = advisor_counts.State
AND primary_grouping.Sub = advisor_counts.Sub
AND primary_grouping.ChapterType = advisor_counts.ChapterType;
- Original Message - From: "Jay Pipes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jesse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "mysql"
timing. However, if I can get your more efficient query working, I
would like to. Any ideas why it's not working?
Thanks,
Jesse
- Original Message -
From: "Jay Pipes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jesse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "mysql"
Sent
Jesse wrote:
I worked with the query for a while, trying equi-joins instead of JOINs,
and variuos other things. I found that the queries that I was using to
represent the TotMem & TotAdv columns was what was closing things down.
I finally ended up using a sub-query to solve the problem. I ga
pterType) AS sq ORDER BY State, Sub, ChapterType
Anyway, thanks for your help.
Jesse
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Buettner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Jesse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "mysql"
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: Query S
, 'PRIMARY,IX_Schools1',
'IX_Schools1', '18', 'bpa.S.State,bpa.S.Sub', 65, 'Using where'
2, 'DEPENDENT SUBQUERY', 'C1', 'ref',
'PRIMARY,IX_Chapters_1,IX_Chapters_2', 'IX_Chapters_1', '
27;, 'S1', 'ref', 'PRIMARY,IX_Schools1',
'IX_Schools1', '18', 'bpa.S.State,bpa.S.Sub', 65, 'Using where'
2, 'DEPENDENT SUBQUERY', 'C1', 'ref',
'PRIMARY,IX_Chapters_1,IX_Chapters_2', '
Jesse, can you post table structures ( SHOW CREATE TABLE tablename )
and the output you get from EXPLAIN followed by the query below?
Also what version of MySQL you're on, and high level details of the
hardware (RAM, disks, processors, OS).
That will all be helpful in trying to help you out he
From: "Price, Randall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jesse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "MySQL List"
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 4:47 PM
Subject: RE: Query Speed
Hi Jesse,
I am not 100% sure cause I have only been using MySQL for ~6 months but
I do read this mailing li
Hi Jesse,
I am not 100% sure cause I have only been using MySQL for ~6 months but
I do read this mailing list everyday and have learned a lot. I believe
that InnoDB tables to not maintain a count(*) for the tables so it has
to physically count the rows. I believe MyISAM tables do maintain that
c
Any suggestions?
On 2/3/06, سيد هادی راستگوی حقی <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
> Thanks for your replies.
>
> The main table for me is traffic_log. I use combination of recipient_id
> and mobile_retry fields to uniquely identify each row in the traffic_log and
> use the same combination
Dear all,
Thanks for your replies.
The main table for me is traffic_log. I use combination of recipient_id and
mobile_retry fields to uniquely identify each row in the traffic_log and use
the same combination on status_log as my foreign key to traffic_log.
Each message is saved as a row in traffic
Sorry, but you gave us a "best guess" situation. Your tables do not have
any PRIMARY KEYs defined on them so I had to guess at what made each row
in each table unique from all other rows in that table based only on your
sample query.
What value or combination of values will allow me to uniquel
Another question is that if I run such CREATE TEMPORARY statements in my
query, is MySQL really can do it fast?
Cause this query may be run periodically !
On 2/2/06, سيد هادی راستگوی حقی <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your suggestion,
> I forget to tell that each message in traffic_log
Thanks for your suggestion,
I forget to tell that each message in traffic_log may has at least 2 status
in status_log and I use to columns "recipients_id" and "mobile_retry"
to uniquely find each message's statuses.
May be I have to change my tables structure. I don't know.
It's really important f
سيد هادی راستگوی حقی <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02/01/2006
11:07:49 AM:
> Dear All,
> I need your suggestions please.
>
> have to large tables with these schemas:
>
> Table: traffic_log
> Create Table: CREATE TABLE `traffic_log` (
> `recipient_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0',
> `retry`
Hadi,
>But it's very slow.
>Do you have any suggestions to fast it?
Your query calls no aggregate functions, so what do you mean to achieve
by GROUP BY ... HAVING? For example this bit of logic extracted from
your query ...
SELECT * FROM table
GROUP BY pkcol
HAVING pkcol=MAX(pkcol)
is logica
Craig Gardner wrote:
Thank you very much. That's what fixed my problem.
Robert J Taylor wrote:
Can you restrict to Not Null instead of != ""? (I.e, can you scrub
the data not to have empty strings?).
The explain shows 3 extra where calculations per row...that's painful.
Great! Glad that sol
Is index defined on all of your tables?
Saqib Ali
-
http://validate.sf.net < (X)HTML / DocBook Validator and Transformer
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Chris Fowler wrote:
> I have a query that is admittedly inefficient in that it is doing
> multiple OR clauses and joining multiple tables.
Chris Fowler wrote:
I have a query that is admittedly inefficient in that it
is doing multiple OR clauses and joining multiple tables. However, the
query runs at an acceptable speed if I am in a terminal session and run
the query directly in the terminal. On the other hand, when PHP
performs th
What are the configuration you are using? What's the size of your buffers?
What's your system?
Maybe increasing sort buffer and key buffer will be good.
;)
Alexis
Quoting Brad Teale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello,
>
> The problem:
> I have the following query with is taking upwards of 2 minute
It sounds like you are referring to full text indexing. Whenever you
have to put a wild card at the start of a word, you should probably
considering using full text indexing. It's easy to implement and the
manual pages are fairly informative.
On Thursday, July 10, 2003, at 02:41 PM, Wendell Din
: Anvar Hussain K.M. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Query Speed
Hi,
Your mail does not tell about the table structure or the index
available.
But try this
key buffer is about 8M
key_buffer_size | 8388600
I just tried bumping my settings up to these that I found in the
manual...
safe_mysqld -O key_buffer=64M -O table_cache=256 \
-O sort_buffer=4M -O record_buffer=1M &
It shaved a second off... 2.29, and later call took
only .88 sec
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 03:29:26PM -0500, Anthony R. J. Ball wrote:
>
> 3.23.41 on Solaris
>
> I have an indexed table of cusips (9 character identifiers)
> which I am comparing against a lookup tables of over
> 1,000,000 securities, also keyed by cusip, both fields are
> char(9) fields.
How
At 10:26 AM + 11/1/01, Leon Noble wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Tried the following three statements and they are wither too slow or do not
>give me what I want. Basically what I want is to search for records for a
>whole month and display totals for that month for each individual day. The
>date field is
Leon Noble writes:
> select dayofmonth(date) as mydate, count(num) as mycount from table_name
> where date='TO_DAYS(2001-08-01) - TO_DAYS(2001-08-31)' and action=1 group by
> dayofmonth(date);
This query makes no sense at all. I don't think the date will
ever be equal to that string constant, u
Hi,
Check the section about How MySQL Optimizes queries for you version - there
is a bit about how indices are not used when calling a function that may be
relevant.
Hope it helps
Quentin
-Original Message-
From: Leon Noble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2001 11:
ger kanrouk
-Original Message-
From: Braxton Robbason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 11:55 AM
To: Roger Karnouk; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Query speed
seems to me that the first query uses your primary key index. Since you have
specified qualifications on crci
seems to me that the first query uses your primary key index. Since you have
specified qualifications on crcid and tag in both aliases, it will resolve
to a small number of rows in each alias table. The second query will join
your aliases on the crcid index, and then the tag qualifications will
r
If you are repeatedly querying tables on non-key fields you can improve query speeds
by implementing indexes on those fields...
For instance, if you had a personnel table with the following fields: id, lastname,
firstname, etc Where id was an auto-increment,primary key you could index the
30 matches
Mail list logo
