Index Table1 And Select For 647.600 Records.. It Is So Slow.. But I Have No Index :)???
Jun 20, 2008
hello friends
i have table1 and 200 coulumn of table1 :) i have 647.600 records. i entered my records to table1 with for step to code lines in one day :)
i select category1 category2 and category3 with select code but i have just one index.. it is productnumber and it is primarykey..So my select code lines is so slow.. it is 7-9 second.. how can i select in 0.1 second ? Should i create index for category1 and category2 and category3 ? But i dont know create index.. My select code lines is below.. Could you learn me and show me index for it ?? or Could you learn me and show me fast Select code lines and index or etc ??? Also my search code line have a dangerous releated to attaching table1 with hackers :)
cheersi send 3 value of treview1 node and childnode and child.childnode to below page.aspx :)
Protected Sub Page_Load(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Me.Load
If Not Me.IsPostBack Then
If Request("TextBox1") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox1.Text = Request("TextBox1")
End If
If Request("TextBox2") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox2.Text = Request("TextBox2")
End If
If Request("TextBox3") IsNot Nothing ThenTextBox3.Text = Request("TextBox3")
End If
End If
Dim searchword As String
If Request("TextBox3") = "" And Request("TextBox2") = "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "'"
End If
If Request("TextBox3") = "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "' and kategori1= '" & Request("TextBox2") & "'"
End If
If Request("TextBox3") <> "" And Request("TextBox2") <> "" And Request("TextBox1") <> "" Then
searchword = "Select * from urunlistesi where kategori= '" & Request("TextBox1") & "' and kategori1= '" & Request("TextBox2") & "' and kategori2= '" & Request("TextBox3") & "'"
One of the major syntax inside the SELECT statment is ..
WHERE FIELDA IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='A') AND WHERE FIELDB IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='B') AND WHERE FIELDC IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='C') AND WHERE FIELDD IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='D') AND WHERE FIELDE IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='E') AND WHERE FIELDF IN (SELECT PARAVALUE FROM PARATABLE WHERE SESSIONID = "XXXXX" AND PARATYPE='F')
(It's to compare the field content with some user input parameter inside a parameter table... )
I think properly is that the SELECT ... IN is causing much slowness in the sql statement. I have indexed FIELDA , FIELDB, FILEDC etc and those PARAVALUE and PARATYPE in the PARATABLE table. But perfromance is still slow and execution takes >20 seconds for 200000 rows of records.
Do any one know if still any chance to improvide the performance like this?
please explain the differences btween this logical & phisicall operations that we can see therir graphical icons in execution plan tab in Management Studio
Table Master Table Dimension ID Code Price ID Name 1 A44333 5000 1 "Scanner" 2 D442 3000 2 "Notebook" 3 D6644 4000 3 "Banana"
I join both tables on ID and search one time for ID and another time for Name. Looks like
(a) SELECT AVG(Price) From Master JOIN Dimension ON Master.id = Dimension.id WHERE master.id=1 AND Code like 'A44' (b) SELECT AVG(Price) From Master JOIN Dimension ON Master.id = Dimension.id WHERE Name = 'Scanner' AND Code like 'A44'
Why does query (b) take longer than query (a)? Dimension has 12 Rows and Master has about 24M Rows.
For index I did Create Index IX_Master_ID on Master(ID) Create Index IX_Master_Code on Master(Code) Create Index IX_Dimension_ID on Dimension(ID) Create Index IX_Dimension_Name on Dimension(Name)
I noticed, that when i leave the Code like 'A44' clause, query (a) and (b) do take same time. I'm really confused. Can someone please help me out?
We have one LEDGER, where all the daily activities are stored. The LEDGER table has 4 indexes (1 clustered and 3 non-clustered). To get AR we use this table.
Well problem is some times in 1-2 months, any simple AR query takes a long time and every other client gets slow response (queries are very slow or sometimes block).
If we DROP any index on LEDGER table and again put it back (RECREATE), all our queries work fine and faster. This goes on till 1-2 months, till we see the same issue again.
This is a classic case happened today. Queries were running fine till morning 8 AM. We upload some 50 thousand records to Ledger table (Data Conversion). Well after 30 mins, all simple AR queries started taking a long time. We DROPPED an index in LEDGER table and everything was faster....Just to be same we added back the same index again.......everything is Faster.....
What is this. ....is it our QUERY, index or huge Transactions or no free space ???
We are scheduled to run SP4, next week. But is there any solution in the mean time on what is this?
Also is they any way to KILL all SQL server processes that take more than a mins. We just don't want ALL our client to Slow down because of one query????
i have a MSSQL 2000 database with about 30 tables in it. On one of those tables i've defined an full text index on an image field. In this table are around 500 records with binary files.
it functioned well for a time but now when i try to upload a file into the table this goes extremely slow (300 KB takes over 3 minutes).
i tried disabling "change tracking" but this didn't help a thing
adding blobs to other tables (without fulltext index on it) still goes fast.
what could be a reason that the uploading goes so slow??
I am using Full Text Index to index emails stored in BLOB column in a table. Index process parses stored emails, and, if there is one or more files attached to the email these documents get indexed too. In result when I'm querying the full text index for a word or phrase I am getting reference to the email containing the word of phrase if interest if the word was used in the email body OR if it was used in any document attached to the email.
How to distinguish in a Full Text query that the result came from an embedded document rather than from "main" document? Or if that's not possible how to disable indexing of embedded documents?
My goal is either to give a user an option if he or she wants to search emails (email bodies only) OR emails AND documents attached to them, or at least clearly indicate in the returned result the real source where the word or phrase has been found.
Web Base application or PDA devices use to initiate the order from all over the country. The issue is this table is not Partioned but good HP with 30 GB RAM is installed. this is main table that receive 18,0000 hits or more. All brokers and users are using this table to see the status of their order.
The always search by OrderID, or ClientID or order_SubNo, or enter any two like (Client_ID+Order_Sub_ID) or any combination.
Query takes to much time when ever server receive more querys. some orther indexes are also created on the same table like (OrderDate, OrdCreate Date and Status)
My Question are:-
Q1. IF Person "A" query to DB on Client_ID, then what Index will use ? (If any one do Query on any two combination like Client_ID+Order_ID, So what index will be uesd.? How does MS-SQL SERVER deal with these kind of issues.?
Q2. If i create 3 more indexes on ClientID, ORderID and OrdersubID. will this improve the performance of query.if person "A" search record on orderNo so what index will be used. (Mind it their would be 3 seprate indexes for Each PK columns) and composite-Clustered index is also available.?
Q3. I want to check what indexes has been used? on what search?
Q4. How can i check what table was populated when, or last date of update (DML)?
My Limitation is i Dont Create a Partioned table. I dont have permission to do it.
In Teradata we had more than 4 tb record of CRM data with no issue. i am not new baby in db line but not expert in sql server 2003.
My SSIS package is running very slow taking so much time to execute, One task is taking 2hr for inserting 100k records, i have disabled unused index still it is taking time.I am rebuilding/Refreshing indexes and stats once in month if i try to execute on daily basis will it improve my SSIS Package performance?
I'm running a merge replication on a sql2k machine to 6 sql2k subscribers. Since a few day's only one of the merge agents fail's with the following error:
The merge process could not retrieve generation information at the 'Subscriber'. The index entry for row ID was not found in index ID 3, of table 357576312, in database 'PBB006'.
All DBCC CHECKDB command's return 0 errors :confused: I'm not sure if the table that's referred to in the message is on the distribution side or the subscribers side? A select * from sysobjects where id=357576312 gives different results on both sides . .
Hi everyone, When we create a clustered index firstly, and then is it advantageous to create another index which is nonclustered ?? In my opinion, yes it is. Because, since we use clustered index first, our rows are sorted and so while using nonclustered index on this data file, finding adress of the record on this sorted data is really easier than finding adress of the record on unsorted data, is not it ??
I have a clustered index that consists of 3 int columns in this order: DateKey, LocationKey, ItemKey (there are many other columns in this data warehouse table such as quantities, prices, etc.).
Now I want to add a non-clustered index on just one of the other columns, say LocationKey, like this: CREATE INDEX IX_test on TableName (LocationKey)
I understand that the clustered index keys will also be added as key columns to any NC indexes. So, in this case the NC index will also get the other two columns from the clustered index added as key columns. But, in what order will they be added?
Will the resulting index keys on this new NC index effectively be:
LocationKey, DateKey, ItemKey OR LocationKey, ItemKey, DateKey
Do the clustering keys get added to a NC index in the same order as they are defined in the clustered index?
Quick question about the primary purpose of Full Text Index vs. Clustered Index.
The Full Text Index has the purpose of being accessible outside of the database so users can query the tables and columns it needs while being linked to other databases and tables within the SQL Server instance. Is the Full Text Index similar to the global variable in programming where the scope lies outside of the tables and database itself?
I understand the clustered index is created for each table and most likely accessed within the user schema who have access to the database.
Is this correct?
I am kind of confused on why you would use full text index as opposed to clustered index.
I'm trying to find whether there is a dmv or system view that can help me see the last time an index was rebuilt or created. Assuming I rebuilt an index using tsql commands (not a job with a history), is there a way to find out the last time that index was rebuilt?
if I create an index for a table with some records, do you think I can retrieve records in a giving range? for example, the 5th to 10th records?Possible? How can I do it?When we insert data at the table, would the index in sequential order? How would the index be created for new inserted records?I'm using SQL 2005 Express, not SQL 2000.
Is there any reason why only heaps can have forwarded records while tables with clustered index have to resort to page split when a page becomes saturated with data due to an update or insertion? Both have drawbacks, forwarded records add another level of indirection, leading to increased I/O overhead, while page split may cause further split in the parent pages which can cascade even further. May be that the cascading is a one-time only cost to be incurred, while the indirection overhead repeats everytime there is a query. Then why not go for page split in heap also? The additional overhead to be had for adding another pointer to the IAM page is also one-time.
Hi,I am making as SELECT query to fill a repeater, and I need to retrieve the index of each line of the query.ie, I want to get a dataset like :"0", "dataCol1", "dataCol2" for the first line"1", "dataCol1", "dataCol2" for the second line"2", "dataCol1", "dataCol2" for the third lineetc.Anyone knows if there is a sql statement that does it ?ThanksJohann
the following will work if I want to have UNIQUE Users.Name >> INSERT INTO [Users] (Name) SELECT Names FROM OtherUsers where OtherUsers.Names not in (select Name from Users)
but if I have an UNIQUE INDEX on Users CREATE UNIQUE INDEX [IX_Users] ON [Users] ([Name],[Category]) ON [PRIMARY] how can I do it ?
INSERT INTO [Users] (Name, Category) SELECT Names,Categories FROM OtherUsers where OtherUsers.Names + OtherUsers.Categories not in (select Name, Category from Users) ?
how can I insert it wih an index on 2 or 3 columns ?
I am new to SQL, especially use SQL in VC++ 6.0 framework.
I am told that creating INDEX on field(s) could speed up a query.
if I create a INDEX like the following <code> CREATE nonclustered INDEX IX_XYZ on TableA.field1 </code> Should I use the INDEX name IX_XYZ in some way in the following SELECT statement. Or the following SELECT statement will be carried out automatically based on the INDEX IX_XYZ.
<code> SELECT * FROM TableA WHERE field1 = xxx </code>
Eliko writes "i would like to add a coloumn to a select result, so there will be another coloumn with indexed running numbers for each record. how can i do it?
I want to Select a value from a Column which is named "Index" - and I don't want to change the name naturally. Is there a way to get a value without mentioning the Column name itself, rather the column number? "Incorrect syntax near 'Index'. If this is intended as a part of a table hint, A WITH keyword and parenthesis are now required. See SQL Server Books Online for proper syntax."
Occurs when I try to simply.. -> SELECT Index FROM Table WHERE Name like 'xyz' <-
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
takes 30-60 seconds to run on my machine, due to a clustered index scan on our an index on asset [about half a million rows]. For this particular association less than 50 rows are returned.
expanding the inner select into a list of guids the query runs instantly:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( '0F9C1654-9FAC-45FC-9997-5EBDAD21A4B4', '52C616C0-C4C5-45F4-B691-7FA83462CA34', 'C95A6669-D6D1-460A-BC2F-C0F6756A234D')
It runs instantly because of doing a clustered index seek [on the same index as the previous query] instead of a scan. The index in question IX_Asset_AssociationGuid is a nonclustered index on Asset.AssociationGuid.
The tables involved:
Asset, represents an asset. Primary key is AssetGuid, there is an index/FK on Asset.AssociationGuid. The asset table has 28 columns or so... Association, kind of like a place, associations exist in a tree where one association can contain any number of child associations. Each association has a ParentAssociationGuid pointing to its parent. Only leaf associations contain assets. AssociationDataAssociation, a table consisting of two columns, AssociationGuid, DataAssociationGuid. This is a table used to quickly find leaf associations [DataAssociationGuid] beneath a particular association [AssociationGuid]. In the above case the inner select () returns 3 rows.
I'd include .sqlplan files or screenshots, but I don't see a way to attach them.
I understand I can specify to use the index manually [and this also runs instantly], but for such a simple query it is peculiar it is necesscary. This is the query with the index specified manually:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WITH (INDEX (IX_Asset_AssociationGuid)) WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
To repeat/clarify my question, why might this not be doing a clustered index seek with the first query?
Hello! I would like when I compare query plans to be able to compare 2 queries where the 1. is the "normal" version and the 2. the version where I forced compiler not to use a specific index (i don't want to force at table scan, so hint index(0) can't be used).
The only way I see how I could achieve something similar is to to drop the index and compare response time before and after. But building index could be time consuming...
Is it possible?
select col42 from tbl; select col42 from tbl with...
