How can I optimize this further?
My table has approx. 121,246,211 rows. The records are simple page impression information.
Here is the schema:
create table stat_page
(
id int auto_increment primary key,
pageId int not null,
timestamp int not null
)
collate = utf8_unicode_ci;
create index pageIdIndex
on stat_page (pageId);
create index timestampIndex
on stat_page (timestamp);
This query takes 15 seconds:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400;
This query takes nearly 7 minutes:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400
and pageId = 87;
I thought I indexed the right things; is the table just too large? Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to get information from this table faster?
mysql sql
add a comment |
My table has approx. 121,246,211 rows. The records are simple page impression information.
Here is the schema:
create table stat_page
(
id int auto_increment primary key,
pageId int not null,
timestamp int not null
)
collate = utf8_unicode_ci;
create index pageIdIndex
on stat_page (pageId);
create index timestampIndex
on stat_page (timestamp);
This query takes 15 seconds:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400;
This query takes nearly 7 minutes:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400
and pageId = 87;
I thought I indexed the right things; is the table just too large? Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to get information from this table faster?
mysql sql
add a comment |
My table has approx. 121,246,211 rows. The records are simple page impression information.
Here is the schema:
create table stat_page
(
id int auto_increment primary key,
pageId int not null,
timestamp int not null
)
collate = utf8_unicode_ci;
create index pageIdIndex
on stat_page (pageId);
create index timestampIndex
on stat_page (timestamp);
This query takes 15 seconds:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400;
This query takes nearly 7 minutes:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400
and pageId = 87;
I thought I indexed the right things; is the table just too large? Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to get information from this table faster?
mysql sql
My table has approx. 121,246,211 rows. The records are simple page impression information.
Here is the schema:
create table stat_page
(
id int auto_increment primary key,
pageId int not null,
timestamp int not null
)
collate = utf8_unicode_ci;
create index pageIdIndex
on stat_page (pageId);
create index timestampIndex
on stat_page (timestamp);
This query takes 15 seconds:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400;
This query takes nearly 7 minutes:
select count(*)
from stat_page
where `timestamp` > 1543622400
and pageId = 87;
I thought I indexed the right things; is the table just too large? Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to get information from this table faster?
mysql sql
mysql sql
asked Jan 2 at 22:09


dataskillsdataskills
436612
436612
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The following index will improve the performance of that query:
create index ix1 on stat_page (pageId, timestamp);
This query benefits of this "composite" index.
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (=
) for the columnpageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.
– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
add a comment |
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54013833%2fhow-can-i-optimize-this-further%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The following index will improve the performance of that query:
create index ix1 on stat_page (pageId, timestamp);
This query benefits of this "composite" index.
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (=
) for the columnpageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.
– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
add a comment |
The following index will improve the performance of that query:
create index ix1 on stat_page (pageId, timestamp);
This query benefits of this "composite" index.
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (=
) for the columnpageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.
– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
add a comment |
The following index will improve the performance of that query:
create index ix1 on stat_page (pageId, timestamp);
This query benefits of this "composite" index.
The following index will improve the performance of that query:
create index ix1 on stat_page (pageId, timestamp);
This query benefits of this "composite" index.
answered Jan 2 at 22:10


The ImpalerThe Impaler
11.5k41441
11.5k41441
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (=
) for the columnpageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.
– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
add a comment |
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (=
) for the columnpageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.
– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
1
1
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (
=
) for the column pageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
@DStanley I think switching the order of the columns will improve the other query but not this one. This query has an equality (
=
) for the column pageId
, that should greatly benefit of this column to be placed in first place.– The Impaler
Jan 2 at 22:35
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
Excellent, thank you, I don't know why I did not think of that. Cheers.
– dataskills
Jan 3 at 4:12
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54013833%2fhow-can-i-optimize-this-further%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown