On 8/9/11 10:23 PM, Wade Preston Shearer wrote: > On 9 Aug 2011, at 22:14, Steve Meyers wrote: > >>> On 8/9/11 9:27 PM, Wade Preston Shearer wrote: >>>>> Sorry… the =39 shouldn't have been in there. It should >>>>> return multiple rows. I pasted the wrong query. I was testing >>>>> with that. Here is the query: >>>>> >>>>> http://pastie.org/2348436 >>> >>> What times do you get for each of the inner queries, and how many >>> results? To optimize this query, you first need to identify >>> which part is slow, and this query has multiple parts. > The first: 22041 rows in set (0.06 sec) > > The second: 1324011 rows in set (2.53 sec)
After looking at it more closely, it's just a really ugly query. Sometimes queries just can't be optimized that much. What I would probably do is just cache it once an hour, or as often as is feasible. Alternatively, you could use something like FlexViews to create a materialized view, which could be updated much more frequently with little penalty. Steve _______________________________________________ UPHPU mailing list [email protected] http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
