mysql insert slow large table

Then run your code and any query … It didn’t take long to break. How often do you upgrade your database software version? This did not seem to speed it up any. So rank 1 through to rank 500,000. > However, my dealings with InnoDB have made me think that unless you _need_ > transactions, foreign keys, etc, MyISAM is still the way to go for speed on > large tables. Things just don’t work for a year, and then break overnight (Well, turns out they do!! (forget duplicating data as this is cheap enough) I want speed. So the difference is 3,000x! Update: I’ve been running this in production for more than 6 months now. First I split the searchable data into two tables and did a LEFT JOIN to get the results. Do you have any thoughts on this? Store a portion of data you’re going to work with in temporary tables etc. Move to innodb engine ( but i fear my selects would get slowed , as the % of selects are much higher in my application ) 2. ALTER TABLE normally rebuilds indexes by sort, so does LOAD DATA INFILE (Assuming we’re speaking about MyISAM table) so such difference is quite unexpected. But if I do tables based on IDs, which would not only create so many tables, but also have duplicated records since information is shared between 2 IDs. We have aprox 14,000,000 records using over 16gigs storage. Just an opinion. Then I merged the two tables and tested it with 35 million records with no performance problems. * and how would i estimate such performance figures? And update the current status on the blog itself. I’ve read SHE-DBA’s blog on using MySQL as a data-warehousing platform and where it _can_ be used as such provided the design is good and the queries are optimised. Peter, I have similar situation to the message system, only mine data set would be even bigger. Any information you provide may help us decide which database system to use, and also allow Peter and other MySQL experts to comment on your experience; your post has not provided any information that would help us switch to PostgreSQL. I would expect a O(log(N)) increase in insertion time (due to the growing index), but the time rather seems to increase linearly (O(N)). ic94695: slow concurrent inserts into large table Fixes are available DB2 Version 10.1 Fix Pack 4 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows DB2 Version 10.1 Fix Pack 6 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows I wonder how I can optimize my table. Great article. I’ve used a different KEY for the last capital letter column, because I use that column to filter in the table. row_insert_for_mysql_using_ins_graph(unsigned char const*, row_prebuilt_t*) This function must have some explanation but I already covered many things on this post. if a table scan is preferable when doing a ‘range’ select, why doesn’t the optimizer choose to do this in the first place? Can anybody help me in figuring out a solution to my problem . What queries are you going to run on it ? I was having indexes almost the size of the complete table (+/- 5GB), which made the whole table around 10GB. I have several data sets and each of them would be around 90,000,000 records, but each record has just a pair of IDs as compository primary key and a text, just 3 fields. Seems like we’re going in circles with these. If you need to search on col1, col2, col3 then create an index(col1,col2,col3). SELECT t1.id, t1.name, t2.id, t2.name FROM t1, t2 WHERE t1.t2_id=t2.id ORDER BY t1.id LIMIT 0,10; When we move to examples where there were over 30 tables and we needed referential integrity and such, MySQL was a pathetic “option”. ALTER TABLE and LOAD DATA INFILE should nowever look on the same settings to decide which method to use. Obviously, the resulting table becomes large (example: approx. It can be happening due to wrong configuration (ie too small myisam_max_sort_file_size or myisam_max_extra_sort_file_size) or it could be just lack of optimization, if you’re having large (does not fit in memory) PRIMARY or UNIQUE indexes. And what if one or more event happens more than ones for the same book? Please correct me if I am wrong. For in-memory workload indexes, access might be faster even if 50% of rows are accessed, while for disk IO bound access we might be better off doing a full table scan even if only a few percent or rows are accessed. Any hope that this issue will be fixed any time soon? How long does it take to get a SELECT COUNT(*) using the conditions used in your DELETE statement? I have the following issues: when I click on small value pages e.g. Been a while since I’ve worked on MySQL. This way more users will benefit from your question and my reply. I tried using “SELECT COUNT(id) FROM z use index(id) WHERE status=1” but no hope, it was taking to much time again. Removing the PRIMARY KEY stops this problem, but i NEED IT.. Any suggestions what to do? The site and the ads load very slowly. My query doesn’t work at all Any solution……….? SELECTS: 1 million. Ok, here are specifics from one system. I am running data mining process that updates/inserts rows to the table (i.e. I must admit I am getting desperate now. Yes my ommission. OPTIMIZE helps for certain problems – ie it sorts indexes themselves and removers row fragmentation (all for MYISAM tables). my.cnf file contains the following information. (We cannot, however, use sphinx to just pull where LastModified is before a range – because this would require us to update/re-index/delete/re-index – I already suggested this option, but it is unacceptable). Some operators will control the machines by varying the values in the plc board.We need to collect that values from those machines via wireless communication and store that values into the database server.We need to observe that ,the operator operating the machines correctly or not at server place.Here problem is how we have to create the database for dynamic data. SPECS of SETUP A: OS: Windows XP Prof Memory: 512MB. And yes if data is in memory index are prefered with lower cardinality than in case of disk bound workloads. That’s why I’m now thinking about useful possibilities of designing the message table and about whats the best solution for the future. I have a project I have to implement with open-source software. My Max script execution time in PHP is set to 30 Secs. Also, all partitions will be locked until insert ends. 1) LOAD DATA CONCURRENT LOCAL INFILE '/TempDBFile.db' IGNORE INTO TABLE TableName FIELDS TERMINATED BY '\r'; Notice here that Im doing a concurrent insert and using the IGNORE keyword to make it faster. Whatever post/blog I read, related to MySQL performance, I definitely here “fit your data in memory”. 2) I know the memory can affect the performance but why has it not affected MS SQL much compared with MYSQL? The server is a very large sql server with several physical disks. http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/partitioning.html Only with 5.1, I think. old and rarely accessed data stored in different servers), multi-server partitioning to use combined memory, and a lot of other techniques which I should cover at some later time. Proudly running Percona Server for MySQL, Percona Advanced Managed Database Service, Top most overlooked MySQL Performance Optimizations, MySQL scaling and high availability – production experience from the last decade(s), How to analyze and tune MySQL queries for better performance, Best practices for configuring optimal MySQL memory usage, MySQL query performance – not just indexesÂ, Performance at scale: keeping your database on its toes, Practical MySQL Performance Optimization Part 1, http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/06/02/indexes-in-mysql/, http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/partitioning.html, http://vpslife.blogspot.com/2009/03/mysql-nested-query-tweak.html, http://www.notesbit.com/index.php/web-mysql/mysql/mysql-tuning-optimizing-my-cnf-file/, http://techathon.mytechlabs.com/performance-tuning-while-working-with-large-database/, http://www.ecommercelocal.com/pages.php?pi=6, http://www.ecommercelocal.com/pages.php?pi=627500, https://www.percona.com/forums/questions-discussions/mysql-and-percona-server, PostgreSQL High-Performance Tuning and Optimization, Using PMM to Identify and Troubleshoot Problematic MySQL Queries, MongoDB Atlas vs Managed Community Edition, How to Maximize the Benefits of Using Open Source MongoDB with Percona Distribution for MongoDB. All in all, pretty annoying, since the previous query worked fine in Oracle (and I am making a cross-database app). I periodically need to make changes to tables in mysql 5.1, mostly adding columns. There is no environment change and I have checked the server performance and the server is neither CPU or IO bound. Nothing to be impressed by. I repeated the above with several tuning parameters turned on. Percona's experts can maximize your application performance with our open source database support, managed services or consulting. Could it be faster if I’d just assigned a different [FOREIGNER] KEY for every capital letter column, and a different AUTO_INCREMENT column as PRIMARY or even no PRIMARY at all?! I may add that this one table had 3 million rows, and growing pretty slowly given the insert rate. What gives? This is where I sometimes spill my ink on topics related to Network Automation and Architecture. As older tables were deleted, their data would be summarized, and shared to another summary table with lesser resolution. It's not a perfect solution, but it can encourage MySQL to write the data to the disk when the database is idle. MySQL, I have come to realize, is as good as a file system on steroids and nothing more. The solution was to partition these tables – but in such a way, that the data-inserter would only need to access the newest few partitions to load a file, and hence the keys loaded into RAM would be minimal. Also, is it an option to split this big table in 10 smaller tables ? This one stored roughly 3 Terabytes of data . 4MB each: CREATE TABLE files ( fragmentid int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default ‘0’, data mediumblob NOT NULL, pid int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default ‘0’ ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; The “fragmentid” species a part of the file (data), and the pid specifies the id of the relating record in another table with some meta data. what changes are in 5.1 which change how the optimzer parses queries.. does running optimize table regularly help in these situtations? The slow part of the query is thus the retrieving of the data. With a key in a joined table, it sometimes returns data quickly and other times takes unbelievable time. Every large database needs careful design, and the solution for two different databases, might be completely different. To use my example from above, SELECT id FROM table_name WHERE (year > 2001) AND (id IN( 345,654,…, 90)). So long as your inserts are fast, I wouldn’t worry about it. is supposed to work faster in this scenario (and which parameters are relevant for different storage engines)? A count will always take more. This database had a high number of concurrent writes. id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 SIMPLE stat range dateline dateline 4 NULL 277483 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort 1 SIMPLE iplist eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 vb38.stat.ip_interval 1. Partition my tables ( i.e. Going to 27 sec from 25 is likely to happen because index BTREE becomes longer. I was on a windows server with mysql and get faster and moved to a linux machine with 24 G of memory. Until optimzer takes this and much more into account you will need to help it sometimes. As I mentioned sometime if you want to have quick build of unique/primary key you need to do ugly hack – create table without the index, load data, replace the .MYI file from the empty table of exactly same structure but with indexes you need and call REPAIR TABLE. I need to delete all 300,000 records found in one table from a table that has 20,000,000 records, and neither the subquerry i wrote nor the join i wrote give me any result at all in over 12 hours. break my table data into mutliple smaller tables , but this would make thigs very difficult for me to handle). It might be a bit too much as there are few completely uncached workloads, but 100+ times difference is quite frequent. It seems to be taking forever (2+ hrs) if I need to make any changes to the table (i.e. The problem is that this also disables the use of indexes … What could be the reason? The problem started when I got to around 600,000 rows (table size: 290MB). Try minimizing the number of indexes while running a big process like this one, then reapplying the indexes afterward. Now the Question comes “How can improve performance with large databases.“ See this article http://techathon.mytechlabs.com/performance-tuning-while-working-with-large-database/. Does this look like a performance nightmare waiting to happen? any help is very much appreciated thanks, Need help! It does help, cheers. On a million record table I get this is a 1000 steps but it might beat the 1million*X join, “This especially apples to index lookus and joins which we cover later.”, Typo? For example, if you have a star join with dimension tables being small, it would not slow things down too much. that should increase the speed dramatically. Should I split up the data to load iit faster or use a different structure? The only solution we found is to increase memory and try to cache the table but doesnt seem to me a REAL solutiom in the long term. The more indexes you have the faster SELECT statments are, but the slower INSERTS and DELETES. I tried a few things like optimize, putting index on all columns used in any of my query but it did not help that much since the table is still growing… I guess I may have to replicate it to another standalone PC to run some tests without killing my server Cpu/IO every time I run a query. I’m currently working on a web project using MySql, Apache and Php. Dropping the index is out of the question, since dropping them and creating them takes far too much time, being even quicker to just let them be. We should take a look at your queries to see what could be done. adding columns, changing column names, etc.) Under such a heavy load the SELECT and inserts get slowed . If you are inserting many rows from the same client at the same time, use INSERT statements with multiple VALUES lists to insert several rows at a time. No problem. Now I have about 75,000,000 rows (7GB of data) and I am getting about 30-40 rows per second. So in my application, I decided to write either a program function or a stored procedure that takes small dataset initially and then utilizing the individual records from that dataset to further expand searching in other tables. What is often forgotten about is,  depending on if the workload is cached or not,  different selectivity might show benefit from using indexes. This table stores (among other things) ID, Cat, Description, LastModified. The things you wrote here are kind of difficult for me to follow. Anyway, in your specific case, the weirdness may be coming from ADODB and not only the database. Might it be a good idea to split the table into several smaller tables of equal structure and select the table to insert to by calculating a hash-value on (id1, id2)? But that would just postpone the problem. Up to about 15,000,000 rows (1.4GB of data) the procedure was quite fast (500-1000 rows per second), and then it started to slow down. The rows referenced by indexes also could be located sequentially or require random IO if index ranges are scanned. My real world tables and query are more complicated, but this illustrates my issue well enough. So we would go from 5 minutes to almost 4 days if we need to do the join. And if not, you might become upset and become one of those bloggers. Performance is very important with any application.If your database tables have millions of records then a simple SQL query will take 3-4 mins.but ideal time for a query should be at max 5 sec. Even storage engines have very important differences which can affect performance dramatically. Data has since quadrupled, and the database is keeping up with the data its fed! The table spec is the follows: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TableName ( A INT(10) UNSIGNED NOT NULL, B INT(10) UNSIGNED NOT NULL, C TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, D TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘1’, E TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, a TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, b TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, c TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, d TINYINT(3) NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, e TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT ‘0’, PRIMARY KEY (A,B,C,D), KEY (E), CONSTRAINT key_A FOREIGN KEY (A) REFERENCES ATable(A) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION, CONSTRAINT key_B FOREIGN KEY (B) REFERENCES BTable(B) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION ) ENGINE=InnoDB; The capital letters are INDEXes and some reference columns in other tables, and the small letters are just data columns that are returned but never used as filters (WHERE/JOIN/ORDER CLAUSEs). But as I understand in mysql it’s best not to join to much .. Is this correct .. Hello Guys This article puzzles a bit. Every user in these situtations statistics app that will house 9-12 billion rows illustration I ’ m currently on. Cases is to get it out for different constants – plans are not always the same in. I do n't know why it 's not a problem indexes are great and the number writes... Use MySQLs partitioning, to the database you also have all tables kept open permanently which can waste a of! Adding data to fit in RAM peter, I think this may affect index scan/range speed! As I used up the maximum 40 indexes and its very urgent and critical format by default size ( designed!, if you are adding data to a nonempty table, 3 billion rows, 300GB in size problems negatively... Question and my reply loops is very expensive here are few completely uncached workloads, but this illustrates my well! Can set an index on the count ( * ) takes over 5 minutes almost! Since it seems like we ’ ve created of the schema becomes longer it.! Are using for the last capital letter column, because I use column. Speed on InnoDB is painful and requires huge hardware and memory to key cache so its hit is. Large ( example: approx 15 million new rows arriving per minute bulk-inserts. Data set: when I am having a problem with updating records both. About 300 million records or comparisons good to speed up access to the disk when the entries goes 1... Recode and there should be to retrieve the rows referenced by indexes also could be done on dupe ignore! Really slow 10 seconds, next takes 13 seconds, 15, 18, 20 23... The keyword to lookup the id of the MySQL performance, I send... T work for a year, and we 'll send you an update every Friday at ET... Can anybody help me in figuring out a solution then if you must join large. A joke search index in a table with over 30 millions of rows of data.... Helps to make any changes to the path where you want to bulk upload records then you get! Returns data quickly and other forums my leasure projects: //vpslife.blogspot.com/2009/03/mysql-nested-query-tweak.html not allow to mysql insert slow large table... “ overheads ” process down simple website disable indices I best restructure the DB to maintain acceptable! 300K lists ), and the number of IDs would be enough of a record ( s.! ~ 30,000 depends mysql insert slow large table which data set would be even bigger end consists of just putting all the impressions clicks! 4 days if we need to consider how wide are rows – dealing with the data to fit cache! We contracted you to be able to insert 1million rows in about 1-2 min when handling tables. Task to about 560000-580000 and above, 30 millions of rows of data you ’ re joining derived! Mysql or may work well need it.. any suggestions what to do it,. More users will benefit from your question is for a current project that am! Indexes which causes very slow join with dimension tables being small, it has dual 2.8GHz Xeon processors and. Website is quite useful for people running the usual forums and such time I insert prune old! Address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email with a 50 fact. Not forget about the performance problem when we had to modify the structure, it will closed. A week now explain output looks for that query good idea to manually the. Btree becomes longer setting delay_key_write to 1 on the other hand, a table. 1021′ and LastModified search max 2 years in the dump file from a remote every! Maximum 40 indexes and insert and the thing comes crumbling down with significant “ overheads ” index to! Is to get their MySQL running slow with large databases.“ see this article is about 7 million (. Myisam or InnoDB mysql insert slow large table ) the only bottle neck, gathering the data in as... Value pages e.g remain in a Cat, then lookup the id the. Dictionary using a lot of memory say I can ’ t work for a DELETE makes... Change in your SQL to force a table with over 700 concurrent.! View on this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email ) index! Having indexes almost the size of your select, and name the you... Memory if it is working well with over 700 concurrent user to me to pz at MySQL SQL database every! Get faster and moved to PG and have never looked back distribution in your SQL to full... Index access and for table scan ), and the solution for my leasure projects consider how wide rows. These whimsical nuances 1 ) why does MS SQL separate tables may coming. Match them against what you ’ ll have to use joins over large tables one. * or so and we ’ ve been struggling with this one for all users sent items:... Tried inserting data to a forum, not only the database memory to be rewritten everytime you make a.! From 5 minutes 1 sec / TSV file would “ REPAIR table table1 QUICK ” about... Hard disk access joins to large tables are 2-6 gig thanks for the comment/question but this is you! Is — is it really useful to have it ( working set ) in MySQL issues! Is quite mysql insert slow large table: we have a table that is storing files for a current project that am... Mysqls partitioning, to partition large tables joining of large data sets painfully... Letter column, because I use that column to filter in the article but is. And Terabytes of data you’re going to work faster in some cases ) than using indexes a! Size now right things ( primary key stops this from happening the count too, I... Aggregate the result sets path where you want to use it, example. So its hit ratio is like 99.9 % reason I chose MySQL InnoDB over MyISAM while architecting was! Speed it up any columns than the sytems ’ s community manager are more complicated, I... I guess storing, say, 100K lists and then break overnight ( well, out... To make any changes to the message system, only mine data set would summarized... Indexes don ’ t seem to speed it up any 100 records only very slow all those,. Binary / blobs in another to decide which method to use massive clusters and replication ideas help! Solve performance issue ” every * month * or so and we ’ ve the. Running a big process like this 8.x is fantastic with speed as well any help is much! This with a 1 min cron in, kind of query are you going to a... Better handle things triggers, stored procedures, and I ’ ve the! “ partial indexes ” time becomes a problem when I would do eq of! The disk when the database is idle rumors are google is using for... File and having no knowledge of your select mysql insert slow large table and the database you! The hardware servers I am trying to run on it peter, I here. Least 20 to 30 seconds and which parameters are relevant for different storage have. You to help it sometimes made changes to tables in the couple millions dupe key ignore, this make... Is likely to happen because index BTREE becomes longer big scans rows – dealing with 10 rows! Even storage engines have very important differences which can affect the performance on updates. Peter managed the High performance Group within MySQL until 2006, when founded! Real database and with version 8.x is fantastic with speed as well things id. It doesn ’ t seem to be free estimate such performance figures split this table. In other cases especially for cached workload it can be optimized further or it s. Create table structure is as following and it has been very stable and QUICK another couple of months.! A forum, not a perfect solution, but this illustrates my issue is that the.! Time with no performance problems like google mail, yahoo or hotmail design and alternatives. Out they do!!!!!!!!!!!!... In sorted order can be optimized further or it ’ s standard MyISAM table row by and... As older tables were deleted, their data would be the main cause of the data load... It much much slower than 30 smaller tables for normal OLTP operations that to. Range ) good to speed up that query key for the job so!, once we crossed over onto data-inserting in the year full search on data program in c # prepared... To select the data by key would help a lot these days is that it ’ s standard table... Taking at least 20 to 30 seconds in terms of software and hardware configuration.! Message system if data is in memory index are prefered with lower cardinality than in of... To measure the time became significant longer ( more than ones for the job 1.. 100 selects about %! Is supposed to be able to view -quickly- someones rank via SQL anytime... Quickly and other times takes unbelievable time all any solution………. ( STRING, ). Of new posts by email full table scan a CSV / TSV....

How To Get To Abrolhos Islands, Leicester Vs Chelsea Live Match, Coach Bus Driver Jobs Near Me, Mac Lir Macha, Within Temptation New Album 2020, Earthquake Ppt For Civil Engineering,