Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

query optimizer operator choice - nested loops vs hash match (or merge)

One of my stored procedures was taking too long execute. Taking a look at query execution plan I was able to locate the operation taking too long. It was a nested loop physical operator that had outer table (65991 rows) and inner table (19223 rows). On the nested loop it showed estimated rows = 1,268,544,993 (multiplying 65991 by 19223) as below:

enter image description here

I read a few articles on physical operators used for joins and got a bit confused whether nested loop or hash match would have been better for this case. From what i could gather:

Hash Match - is used by optimizer when no useful indexes are available, one table is substantially smaller than the other, tables are not sorted on the join columns. Also hash match might indicate more efficient join method (nested loops or merge join) could be used.

Question: Would hash match be better than nested loops in this scenario?

Thanks

like image 772
stackoverflowuser Avatar asked Dec 10 '11 22:12

stackoverflowuser


2 Answers

ABSOLUTELY. A hash match would be a huge improvement. Creating the hash on the smaller 19,223 row table then probing into it with the larger 65,991 row table is a much smaller operation than the nested loop requiring 1,268,544,993 row comparisons.

The only reason the server would choose the nested loops is that it badly underestimated the number of rows involved. Do your tables have statistics on them, and if so, are they being updated regularly? Statistics are what enable the server to choose good execution plans.

If you've properly addressed statistics and are still having a problem you could force it to use a HASH join like so:

SELECT * FROM    TableA A -- The smaller table    LEFT HASH JOIN TableB B -- the larger table 

Please note that the moment you do this it will also force the join order. This means you have to arrange all your tables correctly so that their join order makes sense. Generally you would examine the execution plan the server already has and alter the order of your tables in the query to match. If you're not familiar with how to do this, the basics are that each "left" input comes first, and in graphical execution plans, the left input is the lower one. A complex join involving many tables may have to group joins together inside parentheses, or use RIGHT JOIN in order to get the execution plan to be optimal (swap left and right inputs, but introduce the table at the correct point in the join order).

It is generally best to avoid using join hints and forcing join order, so do whatever else you can first! You could look into the indexes on the tables, fragmentation, reducing column sizes (such as using varchar instead of nvarchar where Unicode is not required), or splitting the query into parts (insert to a temp table first, then join to that).

like image 96
ErikE Avatar answered Oct 13 '22 19:10

ErikE


I would not recommend trying to "fix" the plan by forcing the hints in one direction or another. Instead, you need to look to your indexes, statistics and the TSQL code to understand why you have a Table spool loading up 1.2billion rows from 19000.

like image 29
Grant Fritchey Avatar answered Oct 13 '22 17:10

Grant Fritchey