【发布时间】:2012-02-12 04:05:24
【问题描述】:
我正在尝试找出一种更好的方法来编写由 WordPress 的 WP_Query 类生成的以下查询。现在它非常很慢。
SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS wp_posts.*
FROM wp_posts
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta ON (wp_posts.ID = wp_postmeta.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt1 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt1.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt2 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt2.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt3 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt3.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt4 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt4.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt5 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt5.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt6 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt6.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt7 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt7.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt8 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt8.post_id)
WHERE 1=1 AND wp_posts.post_type = 'gemstone'
AND (wp_posts.post_status = 'publish' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'future' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'draft' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'pending' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'private')
AND (wp_postmeta.meta_key = 'gemstone_active_price'
AND (mt1.meta_key = 'gemstone_status' AND CAST(mt1.meta_value AS CHAR) = 'Available')
AND (mt2.meta_key = 'gemstone_length' AND CAST(mt2.meta_value AS DECIMAL(10,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '9')
AND (mt3.meta_key = 'gemstone_width' AND CAST(mt3.meta_value AS DECIMAL(10,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '9')
AND (mt4.meta_key = 'gemstone_depth' AND CAST(mt4.meta_value AS DECIMAL(10,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '7')
AND (mt5.meta_key = 'gemstone_color' AND CAST(mt5.meta_value AS CHAR) IN ('L','K','J','I','H','G','F','E','D'))
AND (mt6.meta_key = 'gemstone_clarity' AND CAST(mt6.meta_value AS CHAR) IN ('I3','I2','I1','SI2','SI1','VS2','VVS2','VVS1','IF','FL'))
AND (mt7.meta_key = 'gemstone_weight' AND CAST(mt7.meta_value AS DECIMAL(10,2)) BETWEEN '0.67' AND '1.85')
AND (mt8.meta_key = 'gemstone_active_price' AND CAST(mt8.meta_value AS DECIMAL(10,2)) BETWEEN '960' AND '2300')
)
GROUP BY wp_posts.ID
ORDER BY wp_postmeta.meta_value+0 ASC
LIMIT 0, 20
我知道它看起来很乱,但是当我在 WHERE 子句(上面的 mt5 和 mt6)中没有 2 个 IN 语句时,整个事情执行得非常快。问题是,我不太了解 SQL,无法找出另一种方法来编写避免使用 IN 语句的查询。有什么想法吗?
更新:
这是此查询的EXPLAIN 输出,以防它对任何人有所帮助。如果有人有任何其他想法,我对任何事情都持开放态度。这让我完全被难住了。
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE wp_postmeta ref post_id,meta_key meta_key 768 const 2 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort
1 SIMPLE mt1 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt2 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.mt1.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt3 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt4 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.mt2.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt5 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt6 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt7 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.mt3.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt8 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE wp_posts eq_ref PRIMARY,type_status_date PRIMARY 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 1 Using where
更新 2:
经过一些更多的实验,我意识到不仅仅是IN() 语句会减慢这个查询的速度。似乎任何一个以上的 IN() 与超过 3 个 BETWEEN...AND... 语句的组合都会对性能产生巨大影响。
例如,如果我删除最后 2 个 AND 子句,查询将在大约 0.04 秒内执行(而使用它们时需要 4.9 秒),或者如果我删除带有 @987654335 的 2 个 AND 子句,它将在 0.04 秒内执行@ 声明。这让我认为 2 查询解决方案可能是最好的,但我不知道如何通过 WordPress WP_Query API 来实现它,如果我这样做了,我想知道这是否比只做一个查询更快然后通过 PHP 过滤结果。
我讨厌使用 PHP 进行过滤的想法,因为我在几个地方读到过,过滤应该留给数据库,因为这是数据库擅长的。顺便说一句,如果有什么不同的话,我正在我的localhost WAMP 服务器上的 WordPress 3.3.1 安装上运行这些查询,该服务器具有足够的处理能力(Intel i7、12 GB RAM 等)。
更新 3:
我正在考虑放弃并从查询中删除所有 IN() 子句并通过 PHP 过滤这些子句,但这有一些严重的缺点。除了效率低下和代码异味之外,它还不允许我正确控制分页。当数据库中的所有内容都被过滤后,我可以简单地使用LIMIT 子句来处理分页。当我使用 PHP 过滤时,我不知道对于任何给定的偏移量会返回多少结果。所以,所有的过滤确实需要在数据库中完成,问题是如何。有没有人对我有任何额外的建议?任何其他信息对任何人都有帮助吗?
更新 4:
在我寻找解决方案的过程中,我将它作为一个问题发布在 WordPress 核心 trac 系统 (http://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/20134) 中。那里的一位开发人员建议我尝试对我在元查询中使用IN 的任何内容使用分类法而不是元数据。我接受了这个建议,我看到了性能提升,但不幸的是,这还远远不够。旧查询需要 4 多秒才能运行,而使用分类法则需要 1 多秒。但是,我意识到我实际上需要 4 个 IN 类型子句(不是原来的 2 个)。使用 2 个额外的分类条款,查询需要 18 秒以上的时间来执行。所以,我回到第一方。我的一个想法(这可能是妄想)是这可能运行得如此缓慢,因为我只有很少的帖子符合标准。出于测试目的,我在数据库中只有 3 个帖子类型为 'gemstone'。会不会有什么关系?
如果有人感兴趣,我的新 SQL 如下所示:
SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS wp_posts.*
FROM wp_posts
INNER JOIN wp_term_relationships ON (wp_posts.ID = wp_term_relationships.object_id)
INNER JOIN wp_term_relationships AS tt1 ON (wp_posts.ID = tt1.object_id)
INNER JOIN wp_term_relationships AS tt2 ON (wp_posts.ID = tt2.object_id)
INNER JOIN wp_term_relationships AS tt3 ON (wp_posts.ID = tt3.object_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta ON (wp_posts.ID = wp_postmeta.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt1 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt1.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt2 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt2.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt3 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt3.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt4 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt4.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt5 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt5.post_id)
INNER JOIN wp_postmeta AS mt6 ON (wp_posts.ID = mt6.post_id)
WHERE 1=1
AND ( wp_term_relationships.term_taxonomy_id IN (71,72,73,74)
AND tt1.term_taxonomy_id IN (89,90,91,92,93,95,96,97)
AND tt2.term_taxonomy_id IN (56,50,104,53)
AND tt3.term_taxonomy_id IN (59,60,62)
)
AND wp_posts.post_type = 'gemstone'
AND (wp_posts.post_status = 'publish' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'future' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'draft' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'pending' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'private')
AND (wp_postmeta.meta_key = 'gemstone_weight'
AND (mt1.meta_key = 'gemstone_status' AND CAST(mt1.meta_value AS CHAR) = 'Available')
AND (mt2.meta_key = 'gemstone_length' AND CAST(mt2.meta_value AS DECIMAL(8,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '9')
AND (mt3.meta_key = 'gemstone_width' AND CAST(mt3.meta_value AS DECIMAL(8,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '9' )
AND (mt4.meta_key = 'gemstone_depth' AND CAST(mt4.meta_value AS DECIMAL(8,2)) BETWEEN '0' AND '7')
AND (mt5.meta_key = 'gemstone_weight' AND CAST(mt5.meta_value AS DECIMAL(8,2)) BETWEEN '0.81' AND '1.81')
AND (mt6.meta_key = 'gemstone_active_price' AND CAST(mt6.meta_value AS DECIMAL(8,2)) BETWEEN '1083.9' AND '2078.26')
)
GROUP BY wp_posts.ID
ORDER BY wp_postmeta.meta_value+0 ASC
LIMIT 0, 20
新的EXPLAIN输出如下:
id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra
1 SIMPLE wp_postmeta ref post_id,meta_key meta_key 768 const 3 Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort
1 SIMPLE tt3 ref PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id PRIMARY 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 1 Using where; Using index
1 SIMPLE tt2 ref PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id PRIMARY 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 1 Using where; Using index
1 SIMPLE wp_term_relationships ref PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id PRIMARY 8 db.tt2.object_id 1 Using where; Using index
1 SIMPLE wp_posts eq_ref PRIMARY,type_status_date PRIMARY 8 db.wp_postmeta.post_id 1 Using where
1 SIMPLE tt1 ref PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id PRIMARY 8 db.wp_posts.ID 1 Using where; Using index
1 SIMPLE mt5 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_posts.ID 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt6 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.wp_posts.ID 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt1 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.mt5.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt2 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.mt1.post_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt3 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.tt2.object_id 2 Using where
1 SIMPLE mt4 ref post_id,meta_key post_id 8 db.tt3.object_id 2 Using where
更新 5: 由于有评论,我最近在optimizing this query 上进行了另一次尝试,但我得出的结论是,SQL 几乎必须按原样设置。然而,在测试一些替代方案时,我发现奇怪的是查询现在运行得更快了。我还没有更新我的 MySQL 服务器,所以我能理解的唯一原因是 WordPress 以某种方式更新了他们的数据库结构以提高性能。更新 4 中显示的完全相同的查询现在大约需要 2.4 秒。我认为仍然太长了(所以我仍在使用 STRAIGHT_JOIN,如下面的答案所示),但我对改进感到惊讶,这让我想知道是否有不同的解决方案可以进一步优化。这是新的 EXPLAIN 输出。它看起来和我几乎一模一样,但我真的不知道如何解释它。
+-----+--------------+------------------------+---------+---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+-----+--------------+------------------------+---------+---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | wp_postmeta | ref | post_id,meta_key | meta_key | 768 | const | 5 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 1 | SIMPLE | wp_term_relationships | ref | PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id | PRIMARY | 8 | db.wp_postmeta.post_id | 1 | Using where; Using index |
| 1 | SIMPLE | tt2 | ref | PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id | PRIMARY | 8 | db.wp_term_relationships.object_id | 1 | Using where; Using index |
| 1 | SIMPLE | tt3 | ref | PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id | PRIMARY | 8 | db.wp_term_relationships.object_id | 1 | Using where; Using index |
| 1 | SIMPLE | wp_posts | eq_ref | PRIMARY,type_status_date | PRIMARY | 8 | db.wp_postmeta.post_id | 1 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | tt1 | ref | PRIMARY,term_taxonomy_id | PRIMARY | 8 | db.wp_posts.ID | 1 | Using where; Using index |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt3 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.tt2.object_id | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt4 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.tt3.object_id | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt5 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.wp_posts.ID | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt6 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.wp_posts.ID | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt1 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.mt5.post_id | 3 | Using where |
| 1 | SIMPLE | mt2 | ref | post_id,meta_key | post_id | 8 | db.mt3.post_id | 3 | Using where |
+-----+--------------+------------------------+---------+---------------------------+-----------+----------+-------------------------------------+-------+----------------------------------------------+
【问题讨论】:
-
作为更新。当我在 phpMyAdmin 中打开分析并运行此查询时,“统计”占已用时间的 99%。有谁知道在这种情况下“统计”是什么意思?
-
尝试删除额外的 INNER JOIN,正如我在这里解释的那样:stackoverflow.com/a/15398104/212076
标签: mysql performance wordpress