Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > Microsoft SQL Server > SQL Server

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:31 AM
bala
 
Posts: n/a
Default SQL Statement Tuning

hi!!!

the following is the sql which is veri slow cos of the 'Not In' clause,
would appreciate if u anyone can suggest any other way to bring about
the same result

SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
FROM tblRows
WHERE tblRows.AGENCY NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT B.AGENCY
FROM tblRows AS A, tblRows AS B
WHERE A.LOC = "B"
AND B.AGENCY = A.AGENCY
AND B.BATCH = A.BATCH)

tblRows
ID LOC AGENCY BATCH
1 B 1000 WAD
2 R 1000 WAD
3 B 1010 QAD
4 B 1020 WAD
5 R 1020 WAD
6 R 1030 RRR
7 I 1030 RRR
8 V 1030 RRR
9 B 1040 UIA
10 R 1040 UIA
11 I 1040 UIA
12 V 1040 UIA

the subquery is to return the rows with LOC = B. the above query as the
whole should return the rows where LOC <> b and also must exclude rows
belong to the LOC = B subset (that is for example the first two rows
with ID 1 and 2. the first row with ID 1 has LOC as B, Agency as 1000
and BATCH as WAD. the second row with Id 2 has LOC as R as the same
AGENCY and BATCH as first row with ID 1 so is the subset of first row.
similarly row with Id's 4 and 5.

the above query must return the following the rows (that is we can say
the orphan rows which doesn't have LOC AS B nor belongs to the B's
subset

6 R 1030 RRR
7 I 1030 RRR
8 V 1030 RRR

hope i am clear in my explanation and would appreciate if someone can
point me in the right direction. the reason for posting this in ms
access group is because this is going to be a query in MS Access.

regards
bala

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:31 AM
Dan Guzman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

Consinder using NOT EXISTS and creating helpful indexes. For example:

CREATE TABLE tblRows
(
ID int NOT NULL,
LOC char(1) NOT NULL,
AGENCY int NOT NULL,
BATCH char(3) NOT NULL
)
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(1,'B',1000,'WAD')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(2,'R',1000,'WAD')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(3,'B',1010,'QAD')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(4,'B',1020,'WAD')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(5,'R',1020,'WAD')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(6,'R',1030,'RRR')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(7,'I',1030,'RRR')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(8,'V',1030,'RRR')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(9,'B',1040,'UIA')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(10,'R',1040,'UIA')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(11,'I',1040,'UIA')
INSERT INTO tblRows VALUES(12,'V',1040,'UIA')
GO

ALTER TABLE tblRows
ADD CONSTRAINT PK_tblRows PRIMARY KEY(ID)
GO

CREATE INDEX Index1 ON tblRows(LOC, AGENCY, BATCH)
GO

SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
FROM tblRows B
WHERE NOT EXISTS
(
SELECT *
FROM tblRows AS A
WHERE A.LOC = 'B'
AND B.AGENCY = A.AGENCY
AND B.BATCH = A.BATCH
)


--
Hope this helps.

Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP

"bala" <balkiir@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110334059.973692.269180@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> hi!!!
>
> the following is the sql which is veri slow cos of the 'Not In' clause,
> would appreciate if u anyone can suggest any other way to bring about
> the same result
>
> SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
> FROM tblRows
> WHERE tblRows.AGENCY NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT B.AGENCY
> FROM tblRows AS A, tblRows AS B
> WHERE A.LOC = "B"
> AND B.AGENCY = A.AGENCY
> AND B.BATCH = A.BATCH)
>
> tblRows
> ID LOC AGENCY BATCH
> 1 B 1000 WAD
> 2 R 1000 WAD
> 3 B 1010 QAD
> 4 B 1020 WAD
> 5 R 1020 WAD
> 6 R 1030 RRR
> 7 I 1030 RRR
> 8 V 1030 RRR
> 9 B 1040 UIA
> 10 R 1040 UIA
> 11 I 1040 UIA
> 12 V 1040 UIA
>
> the subquery is to return the rows with LOC = B. the above query as the
> whole should return the rows where LOC <> b and also must exclude rows
> belong to the LOC = B subset (that is for example the first two rows
> with ID 1 and 2. the first row with ID 1 has LOC as B, Agency as 1000
> and BATCH as WAD. the second row with Id 2 has LOC as R as the same
> AGENCY and BATCH as first row with ID 1 so is the subset of first row.
> similarly row with Id's 4 and 5.
>
> the above query must return the following the rows (that is we can say
> the orphan rows which doesn't have LOC AS B nor belongs to the B's
> subset
>
> 6 R 1030 RRR
> 7 I 1030 RRR
> 8 V 1030 RRR
>
> hope i am clear in my explanation and would appreciate if someone can
> point me in the right direction. the reason for posting this in ms
> access group is because this is going to be a query in MS Access.
>
> regards
> bala
>



Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:32 AM
bala
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

hi dan

thanx for the response. i did try with 'WHERE NOT EXISTS' but didn't
return any row. i am stumped now

thanx buddy
bala

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:32 AM
Dan Guzman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

I get the following results when I run the script I posted so I'm not sure
how your environment differs:

Id LOC AGENCY BATCH
----------- ---- ----------- -----
7 I 1030 RRR
6 R 1030 RRR
8 V 1030 RRR

--
Hope this helps.

Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP

"bala" <balkiir@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110368212.091319.272270@l41g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> hi dan
>
> thanx for the response. i did try with 'WHERE NOT EXISTS' but didn't
> return any row. i am stumped now
>
> thanx buddy
> bala
>



Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:36 AM
julian_muir
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

Your problem is a common generic performance problem

-- old syntax used before SQL 92 outer joins available
SELECT *
FROM A
WHERE A.id NOT IN (SELECT id FROM B)

-- new syntax using SQL 92 joins - can runs 100/1000s of times faster
SELECT *
FROM A LEFT JOIN B ON B.id = A.id
WHERE B.id IS NULL

The theory is simple do an outer join using all rows from table A and filter
them to show only rows where B.id is NULL (= no corresponding row in B)

In your example

SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
FROM tblRows R
LEFT JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT B.AGENCY
FROM tblRows AS A, tblRows AS B
WHERE A.LOC = "B"
AND B.AGENCY = A.AGENCY
AND B.BATCH = A.BATCH) R2
ON R.AGENCY = R2.AGENCY
WHERE R2.AGENCY IS NULL

NOTE: I did not test the queries so - if it does not work it just means that
you need a RIGHT JOIN, as I do not always remember which way round the
syntax goes - the logic however is correct.

Hope this help
Julian 8^)

Change to a JOIN,
"bala" <balkiir@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110334059.973692.269180@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> hi!!!
>
> the following is the sql which is veri slow cos of the 'Not In' clause,
> would appreciate if u anyone can suggest any other way to bring about
> the same result
>
> SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
> FROM tblRows
> WHERE tblRows.AGENCY NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT B.AGENCY
> FROM tblRows AS A, tblRows AS B
> WHERE A.LOC = "B"
> AND B.AGENCY = A.AGENCY
> AND B.BATCH = A.BATCH)
>
> tblRows
> ID LOC AGENCY BATCH
> 1 B 1000 WAD
> 2 R 1000 WAD
> 3 B 1010 QAD
> 4 B 1020 WAD
> 5 R 1020 WAD
> 6 R 1030 RRR
> 7 I 1030 RRR
> 8 V 1030 RRR
> 9 B 1040 UIA
> 10 R 1040 UIA
> 11 I 1040 UIA
> 12 V 1040 UIA
>
> the subquery is to return the rows with LOC = B. the above query as the
> whole should return the rows where LOC <> b and also must exclude rows
> belong to the LOC = B subset (that is for example the first two rows
> with ID 1 and 2. the first row with ID 1 has LOC as B, Agency as 1000
> and BATCH as WAD. the second row with Id 2 has LOC as R as the same
> AGENCY and BATCH as first row with ID 1 so is the subset of first row.
> similarly row with Id's 4 and 5.
>
> the above query must return the following the rows (that is we can say
> the orphan rows which doesn't have LOC AS B nor belongs to the B's
> subset
>
> 6 R 1030 RRR
> 7 I 1030 RRR
> 8 V 1030 RRR
>
> hope i am clear in my explanation and would appreciate if someone can
> point me in the right direction. the reason for posting this in ms
> access group is because this is going to be a query in MS Access.
>
> regards
> bala
>



Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:41 AM
bala
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

hey julian

thanx for the pointer, i have tried different combination of outer
joins but then it is kinda messy and not much difference in
performance. the best bet is start from the scratch.

regards
bala

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:42 AM
Gert-Jan Strik
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

Bala,

You could try using NOT EXISTS. For example:

SELECT Id, LOC, AGENCY, BATCH
FROM tblRows
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM tblRows A
WHERE A.Loc = 'B'
AND A.Agency = tblRows.Agency
AND A.Batch = tblRows.Batch
)

The query would benefit from a (clustered) index on (Loc,Agency,Batch).

Hope this helps,
Gert-Jan


bala wrote:
>
> hey julian
>
> thanx for the pointer, i have tried different combination of outer
> joins but then it is kinda messy and not much difference in
> performance. the best bet is start from the scratch.
>
> regards
> bala

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-29-2008, 06:42 AM
angsql
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: SQL Statement Tuning

Hi Bala,

As Dan pointed out to you. A index { Index1} would speedup your query.
Outer join will never work, It is nothing to do with syntax. Infact it
will change the logic of the query.

Try out creating index and let me know. Could you please set SET
STATISTICS IO ON and show me the stats before & after index creation.

Thank you
Raju

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
UnixAdminTalk.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796