The Question: Why MySQL performance goes down for queries joining nearly empty tables when executed in parallel?
Below is more detailed explanation of the issue I'm facing. I have two tables in MySQL
CREATE TABLE first (
num int(10) NOT NULL,
UNIQUE KEY key_num (num)
) ENGINE=InnoDB
CREATE TABLE second (
num int(10) NOT NULL,
num2 int(10) NOT NULL,
UNIQUE KEY key_num (num, num2)
) ENGINE=InnoDB
The first one contains about a thousand records. The second one is empty or contains a very few records. It also contains double index which somehow relates to the issue: the problem goes away for single index. Now I'm trying to make a lot of identical queries to those tables in parallel. Each query looks like this:
SELECT first.num
FROM first
LEFT JOIN second AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6 # non-existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NULL
AND second_2.num IS NULL
AND second_3.num IS NULL
AND second_4.num IS NULL
AND second_5.num IS NULL
AND second_6.num IS NULL
The issue I'm getting is that instead of having a nearly linear raise in performance on 8 core machine I actually have a drop. Namely having one process, the typical number of requests per second I have is about 200. Having two processes instead of expected increase up to 300 - 400 queries per second I actually have a drop down to 150. For 10 processes I have only 70 queries per seconds. The Perl code I'm using for testing is shown below:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use DBI;
use Parallel::Benchmark;
use SQL::Abstract;
use SQL::Abstract::Plugin::InsertMulti;
my $children_dbh;
foreach my $second_table_row_count (0, 1, 1000) {
print '#' x 80, "\nsecond_table_row_count = $second_table_row_count\n";
create_and_fill_tables(1000, $second_table_row_count);
foreach my $concurrency (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 20) {
my $bm = Parallel::Benchmark->new(
'benchmark' => sub {
_run_sql();
return 1;
},
'concurrency' => $concurrency,
'time' => 3,
);
my $result = $bm->run();
}
}
sub create_and_fill_tables {
my ($first_table_row_count, $second_table_row_count) = @_;
my $dbh = dbi_connect();
{
$dbh->do(q{DROP TABLE IF EXISTS first});
$dbh->do(q{
CREATE TABLE first (
num int(10) NOT NULL,
UNIQUE KEY key_num (num)
) ENGINE=InnoDB
});
if ($first_table_row_count) {
my ($stmt, @bind) = SQL::Abstract->new()->insert_multi(
'first',
['num'],
[map {[$_]} 1 .. $first_table_row_count],
);
$dbh->do($stmt, undef, @bind);
}
}
{
$dbh->do(q{DROP TABLE IF EXISTS second});
$dbh->do(q{
CREATE TABLE second (
num int(10) NOT NULL,
num2 int(10) NOT NULL,
UNIQUE KEY key_num (num, num2)
) ENGINE=InnoDB
});
if ($second_table_row_count) {
my ($stmt, @bind) = SQL::Abstract->new()->insert_multi(
'second',
['num'],
[map {[$_]} 1 .. $second_table_row_count],
);
$dbh->do($stmt, undef, @bind);
}
}
}
sub _run_sql {
$children_dbh ||= dbi_connect();
$children_dbh->selectall_arrayref(q{
SELECT first.num
FROM first
LEFT JOIN second AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1
LEFT JOIN second AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2
LEFT JOIN second AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3
LEFT JOIN second AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4
LEFT JOIN second AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5
LEFT JOIN second AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6
WHERE second_1.num IS NULL
AND second_2.num IS NULL
AND second_3.num IS NULL
AND second_4.num IS NULL
AND second_5.num IS NULL
AND second_6.num IS NULL
});
}
sub dbi_connect {
return DBI->connect(
'dbi:mysql:'
. 'database=tmp'
. ';host=localhost'
. ';port=3306',
'root',
'',
);
}
And for compare queries like this executed in concurrent with increasing performance:
SELECT first.num
FROM first
LEFT JOIN second AS second_1 ON second_1.num = 1 # existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_2 ON second_2.num = 2 # existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_3 ON second_3.num = 3 # existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_4 ON second_4.num = 4 # existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_5 ON second_5.num = 5 # existent key
LEFT JOIN second AS second_6 ON second_6.num = 6 # existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_2.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_3.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_4.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_5.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_6.num IS NOT NULL
Testing results, cpu and disk usage measurements are here:
* table `first` have 1000 rows * table `second` have 6 rows: `[1,1],[2,2],..[6,6]` For query: SELECT first.num FROM first LEFT JOIN second AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1 # non-existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2 # non-existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3 # non-existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4 # non-existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5 # non-existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6 # non-existent key WHERE second_1.num IS NULL AND second_2.num IS NULL AND second_3.num IS NULL AND second_4.num IS NULL AND second_5.num IS NULL AND second_6.num IS NULL Results: concurrency: 1, speed: 162.910 / sec concurrency: 2, speed: 137.818 / sec concurrency: 3, speed: 130.728 / sec concurrency: 4, speed: 107.387 / sec concurrency: 6, speed: 90.513 / sec concurrency: 8, speed: 80.445 / sec concurrency: 10, speed: 80.381 / sec concurrency: 20, speed: 84.069 / sec System usage after for last 60 minutes of running query in 6 processes: $ iostat -cdkx 60 avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 74.82 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 25.02 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.80 13.71 0.00 1.43 1.43 0.02 sdf10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 30.00 15.00 0.05 sdm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 1.24 6.77 0.00 5.00 3.18 0.12 sdf6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 1.33 32.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.03 sdf2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 1.37 16.50 0.00 3.00 3.00 0.05 sdf15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.40 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 50.00 25.00 0.08 sdm2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdm1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00 13.95 28.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ################################################################################ For query: SELECT first.num FROM first LEFT JOIN second AS second_1 ON second_1.num = 1 # existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_2 ON second_2.num = 2 # existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_3 ON second_3.num = 3 # existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_4 ON second_4.num = 4 # existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_5 ON second_5.num = 5 # existent key LEFT JOIN second AS second_6 ON second_6.num = 6 # existent key WHERE second_1.num IS NOT NULL AND second_2.num IS NOT NULL AND second_3.num IS NOT NULL AND second_4.num IS NOT NULL AND second_5.num IS NOT NULL AND second_6.num IS NOT NULL Results: concurrency: 1, speed: 875.973 / sec concurrency: 2, speed: 944.986 / sec concurrency: 3, speed: 1256.072 / sec concurrency: 4, speed: 1401.657 / sec concurrency: 6, speed: 1354.351 / sec concurrency: 8, speed: 1110.100 / sec concurrency: 10, speed: 1145.251 / sec concurrency: 20, speed: 1142.514 / sec System usage after for last 60 minutes of running query in 6 processes: $ iostat -cdkx 60 avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 74.40 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.06 25.01 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.13 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 2.67 40.00 0.00 3.75 2.50 0.03 sdf2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 2.72 23.29 0.00 2.14 1.43 0.03 sdf15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.54 1.10 0.00 2.71 2.71 0.27 sdf1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 1.47 35.20 0.00 8.00 6.00 0.05 sdf13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 sdm2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdm1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdf7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.07 64.00 0.00 10.00 5.00 0.02 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.70 0.00 15.92 18.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ################################################################################ And this server has lots of free memory. Example of top: top - 19:02:59 up 4:23, 4 users, load average: 4.43, 3.03, 2.01 Tasks: 218 total, 1 running, 217 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 72.8%us, 0.7%sy, 0.0%ni, 26.3%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.1%st Mem: 71701416k total, 22183980k used, 49517436k free, 284k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 1282768k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 2506 mysql 20 0 51.7g 17g 5920 S 590 25.8 213:15.12 mysqld 9348 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 2 0.0 0:01.45 perl 9349 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 2 0.0 0:01.44 perl 9350 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 2 0.0 0:01.45 perl 9351 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 1 0.0 0:01.44 perl 9352 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 1 0.0 0:01.44 perl 9353 topadver 20 0 72256 11m 1428 S 1 0.0 0:01.44 perl 9346 topadver 20 0 19340 1504 1064 R 0 0.0 0:01.89 top
Does anyone have an idea why performance decreased for query with non-existent keys?
MySQL is not Oracle (despite being owned by Oracle). It does not support parallel queries. You can, however, get them using shard-query which is a third-party database engine that supports them.
Problem. By default, SQL Server allows a maximum of 32767 concurrent connections which is the maximum number of users that can simultaneously log in to the SQL server instance.
Well written question, that shows some research.
Out of curiosity, I tried MySQL 5.6 to see what the tooling there has to say about these queries.
First, note that the queries are different:
Using EXPLAIN gives different plans:
EXPLAIN SELECT `first`.num
FROM `first`
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6 # non-existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NULL
AND second_2.num IS NULL
AND second_3.num IS NULL
AND second_4.num IS NULL
AND second_5.num IS NULL
AND second_6.num IS NULL
;
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE first index NULL key_num 4 NULL 1000 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_1 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
1 SIMPLE second_2 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
1 SIMPLE second_3 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
1 SIMPLE second_4 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
1 SIMPLE second_5 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
1 SIMPLE second_6 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using where; Not exists; Using index
as opposed to
EXPLAIN SELECT `first`.num
FROM `first`
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_1 ON second_1.num = 1 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_2 ON second_2.num = 2 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_3 ON second_3.num = 3 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_4 ON second_4.num = 4 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_5 ON second_5.num = 5 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_6 ON second_6.num = 6 # existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_2.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_3.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_4.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_5.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_6.num IS NOT NULL
;
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE second_1 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_2 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_3 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_4 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_5 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE second_6 ref key_num key_num 4 const 1 Using index
1 SIMPLE first index NULL key_num 4 NULL 1000 Using index; Using join buffer (Block Nested Loop)
Using the JSON format, we have:
EXPLAIN FORMAT=JSON SELECT `first`.num
FROM `first`
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6 # non-existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NULL
AND second_2.num IS NULL
AND second_3.num IS NULL
AND second_4.num IS NULL
AND second_5.num IS NULL
AND second_6.num IS NULL
;
EXPLAIN
{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "first",
"access_type": "index",
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"rows": 1000,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_1",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_1), isnull(`test`.`second_1`.`num`), true)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_2",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_2), isnull(`test`.`second_2`.`num`), true)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_3",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_3), isnull(`test`.`second_3`.`num`), true)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_4",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_4), isnull(`test`.`second_4`.`num`), true)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_5",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_5), isnull(`test`.`second_5`.`num`), true)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_6",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"not_exists": true,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "<if>(found_match(second_6), isnull(`test`.`second_6`.`num`), true)"
}
}
]
}
}
as opposed to
EXPLAIN FORMAT=JSON SELECT `first`.num
FROM `first`
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_1 ON second_1.num = 1 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_2 ON second_2.num = 2 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_3 ON second_3.num = 3 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_4 ON second_4.num = 4 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_5 ON second_5.num = 5 # existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_6 ON second_6.num = 6 # existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_2.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_3.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_4.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_5.num IS NOT NULL
AND second_6.num IS NOT NULL
;
EXPLAIN
{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_1",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_2",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_3",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_4",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_5",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "second_6",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"key_num"
],
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"const"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "first",
"access_type": "index",
"key": "key_num",
"key_length": "4",
"rows": 1000,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true,
"using_join_buffer": "Block Nested Loop"
}
}
]
}
}
Looking at the table io instrumented by the performance schema at runtime, we have:
truncate table performance_schema.objects_summary_global_by_type;
select * from performance_schema.objects_summary_global_by_type
where OBJECT_NAME in ("first", "second");
OBJECT_TYPE OBJECT_SCHEMA OBJECT_NAME COUNT_STAR SUM_TIMER_WAIT MIN_TIMER_WAIT AVG_TIMER_WAIT MAX_TIMER_WAIT
TABLE test first 0 0 0 0 0
TABLE test second 0 0 0 0 0
SELECT `first`.num
FROM `first`
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_1 ON second_1.num = -1 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_2 ON second_2.num = -2 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_3 ON second_3.num = -3 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_4 ON second_4.num = -4 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_5 ON second_5.num = -5 # non-existent key
LEFT JOIN `second` AS second_6 ON second_6.num = -6 # non-existent key
WHERE second_1.num IS NULL
AND second_2.num IS NULL
AND second_3.num IS NULL
AND second_4.num IS NULL
AND second_5.num IS NULL
AND second_6.num IS NULL
;
(...)
select * from performance_schema.objects_summary_global_by_type
where OBJECT_NAME in ("first", "second");
OBJECT_TYPE OBJECT_SCHEMA OBJECT_NAME COUNT_STAR SUM_TIMER_WAIT MIN_TIMER_WAIT AVG_TIMER_WAIT MAX_TIMER_WAIT
TABLE test first 1003 5705014442 1026171 5687889 87356557
TABLE test second 6012 271786533972 537266 45207298 1123939292
as opposed to:
select * from performance_schema.objects_summary_global_by_type
where OBJECT_NAME in ("first", "second");
OBJECT_TYPE OBJECT_SCHEMA OBJECT_NAME COUNT_STAR SUM_TIMER_WAIT MIN_TIMER_WAIT AVG_TIMER_WAIT MAX_TIMER_WAIT
TABLE test first 1003 5211074603 969338 5195454 61066176
TABLE test second 24 458656783 510085 19110361 66229860
The query that scales does almost no table IO in table second
.
The query that does not scale does 6K table IO in table second
, or 6 times the size of table first
.
This is because the query plans are different, in turn because the queries are different (IS NOT NULL versus IS NULL).
I think that answers the performance related question.
Note that both queries returned 1000 rows in my tests, which may not be what you want. Before tuning a query to make it faster, make sure it works as expected.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With