mysql memory temp table creation SLOW












0















I'm trying to get to the bottom of what I'm thinking is a performance issue when creating in memory temporary tables. The underlying query I have looks to me to be pretty well optimized. The explain is below the query. The temporary table it builds has ~4Million rows. The query (with no cache specified) runs in 150 ms, the creation of the table takes 15 seconds. Couple other interesting things I'm seeing. I'd thought maybe I needed a covering index for the underlying query that builds the table but don't think that's really possible when I'm selecting from two tables that are joined so I replaced the query with a simpler version, just selecting the StoreID. Run time was the same ... ~15 seconds to build the temp table. After the table was created I did a "create table like " and then did the index build. It took about 2 seconds which also doesn't make sense to me. Anyone got any thoughts?



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTTe5f0f36ca5fec1d49a75d5cb5d88233f 
(repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory
AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID,
ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID, 1 as assignmentCount
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN TTTf122b1fd3249346930db2dff0c43b022 existsTT
ON existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores
ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
AND EXISTS
(
SELECT StoreID
from TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62 existsTT
where ent_.MVStoreID=existsTT.StoreID
) ;
/* queryTime - 15.1777 seconds */


The explain is as follows



id  select_type table   type    possible_keys   key key_len ref rows    Extra
1 PRIMARY existsTT ALL ID 20024 Using where
1 PRIMARY ass_ ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,testTwo,joshTest3,anodaTEst,uniqueness,uutt,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObjectID,AssociatedObject testTwo 4 benchmark.existsTT.ID 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY ent_ ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using where; Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT ref st st 5 benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID 2


Here is the json explain



{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ALL",
"possible_keys": [
"ID"
],
"rows": 20024,
"filtered": 100,
"attached_condition": "("benchmark"."existsTT"."ID" is not null)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ass_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"assignmentQuery",
"joshTest",
"testTwo",
"joshTest3",
"anodaTEst",
"uniqueness",
"uutt",
"AssignmentValue",
"AssociatedObjectID",
"AssociatedObject"
],
"key": "testTwo",
"used_key_parts": [
"AssociatedObjectID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.existsTT.ID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "((("benchmark"."ass_"."IsDeleted" = 0) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssociatedObjectClass" = 'MVRep') and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentSubType" = 'ListID')) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" is not
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "list_stores",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"StoreList",
"MVListID",
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVListID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVListID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" = "benchmark"."list_stores"."MVListID")"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ent_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVStoreID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "exists(/* select#2 */ select "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID" from "benchmark"."TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62" "existsTT" where ("benchmark"."ent_"."MVStoreID" = "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID"
"attached_subqueries": [
{
"dependent": true,
"cacheable": false,
"query_block": {
"select_id": 2,
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"st"
],
"key": "st",
"used_key_parts": [
"StoreID"
],
"key_length": "5",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 2,
"filtered": 100
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}


show create table syntax for all involved tables:



CREATE TABLE "MVAssignment" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"ClassName" enum('MVAssignment') DEFAULT 'MVAssignment',
"Created" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"LastEdited" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"AssignmentType" enum('MVCustomField','MVBrand','MVStore','MVList','MVRetailer','MVBillingCode','MVRep','MVTagName','MVSkillAndCapability') DEFAULT 'MVCustomField',
"AssignmentSubType" enum('SkillsAndCapabilities','SkillAndCapabilityID','allSkillsAndCapabilities','BrandID','Brands','allBrands','CustomFields','CustomFieldNameID','CustomFieldValue','allCustomFields','BillingCodes','BillingCodeID','allBillingCodes','Lists','ListID','allLists','RepID','allReps','Reps','RepsLetterRange','Stores','StoresLetterRange','StoresState','StoresZip','StoreZip','StoresCity','StoreID','allStores','StoreZips','StoreZipsRange','allStoreZips','StoresByNumber','StoreNumberID','allStoresByNumber','Retailers','RetailersLetterRange','RetailerID','allRetailers','Tags','TagNameID','TagValue','allTags') DEFAULT 'SkillsAndCapabilities',
"AssignmentValue" varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
"AssociatedObjectClass" enum('MVmPlan','MVRep','MVSalesToolBucket','MVUsergroup','MVAlert','MVItemLevelOverride') DEFAULT 'MVmPlan',
"AssociatedObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"IsDeleted" tinyint(1) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerObjectClass" enum('MVEntityUser') DEFAULT 'MVEntityUser',
"OwnerObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerUsergroupID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"UniquenessHash" varchar(32) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "OwnerObject" ("OwnerObjectClass","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "assignmentQuery" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","AssignmentSubType"),
KEY "joshTest" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted"),
KEY "testTwo" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted"),
KEY "joshTest3" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "anodaTEst" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","AssignmentValue"),
KEY "uniqueness" ("IsDeleted","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentType","AssociatedObjectID","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "uutt" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "AssignmentValue" ("AssignmentValue"),
KEY "AssociatedObjectID" ("AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "OwnerObjectID" ("OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "AssociatedObject" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "ClassName" ("ClassName"),
KEY "rickJames" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted")
)

CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE "TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c" (
"ID" int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
KEY "ID" ("ID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVList_Stores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVListID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "StoreList" ("MVStoreID","MVListID"),
KEY "MVListID" ("MVListID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVMasterEntityID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "MVMasterEntityID" ("MVMasterEntityID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)


The slow query log for the create table syntax is the following



2018-06-21 13:32:25 benchmark[benchmark] @  [10.0.0.214]    00:00:15    00:00:00    0   8048999 benchmark   0   0   1548456745
/* queryTime - 0.8239 seconds */
↵↵CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611cfe97d6fc08d6242f403e3317551 (repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID, ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID/*, count(ass_.AssociatedObjectID) as assignmentCount*/ , 1 as assignmentCount FROM MVAssignment AS ass_ JOIN TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT on existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
/* GROUP BY ass_.AssociatedObjectID, ent_.MVStoreID*/ 42994


I've rearranged the query a little bit simplified it a bit for testing (takes 7 seconds but only one column is selected / created on the temp table)...



SELECT  mvas.MVStoreID AS StoreID
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN MVList_Stores AS list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores mvas ON mvas.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT ID
FROM TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT
WHERE existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
)
AND ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0 ;


slightly different explain



1   PRIMARY ass_    ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,joshTest3,uniqueness,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObject,rickJames    uniqueness  2   const,const 27457   Using index condition; Using where
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 114 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY mvas ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 benchmark.ass_.AssociatedObjectID 1 NULL


So, I would normally be thinking , well this is as fast as I can get it ... but if I do a super simple query like this...



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611rcfe97ed6fc08d6242f403e3d3r1r74d5dd51 (
StoreID INT NOT NULL
) engine=memory AS
SELECT MVStoreID FROM MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_;


which puts 4 million rows in a temp table in < 1 sec ... it makes me think there is some way I can arrange my query so that it builds the temp table in a similar time that it takes to run the underlying query. Should I give it up ?










share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 13 mins ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
















  • also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:24











  • I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:53











  • I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 18:49











  • What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:15











  • Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:22


















0















I'm trying to get to the bottom of what I'm thinking is a performance issue when creating in memory temporary tables. The underlying query I have looks to me to be pretty well optimized. The explain is below the query. The temporary table it builds has ~4Million rows. The query (with no cache specified) runs in 150 ms, the creation of the table takes 15 seconds. Couple other interesting things I'm seeing. I'd thought maybe I needed a covering index for the underlying query that builds the table but don't think that's really possible when I'm selecting from two tables that are joined so I replaced the query with a simpler version, just selecting the StoreID. Run time was the same ... ~15 seconds to build the temp table. After the table was created I did a "create table like " and then did the index build. It took about 2 seconds which also doesn't make sense to me. Anyone got any thoughts?



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTTe5f0f36ca5fec1d49a75d5cb5d88233f 
(repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory
AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID,
ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID, 1 as assignmentCount
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN TTTf122b1fd3249346930db2dff0c43b022 existsTT
ON existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores
ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
AND EXISTS
(
SELECT StoreID
from TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62 existsTT
where ent_.MVStoreID=existsTT.StoreID
) ;
/* queryTime - 15.1777 seconds */


The explain is as follows



id  select_type table   type    possible_keys   key key_len ref rows    Extra
1 PRIMARY existsTT ALL ID 20024 Using where
1 PRIMARY ass_ ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,testTwo,joshTest3,anodaTEst,uniqueness,uutt,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObjectID,AssociatedObject testTwo 4 benchmark.existsTT.ID 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY ent_ ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using where; Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT ref st st 5 benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID 2


Here is the json explain



{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ALL",
"possible_keys": [
"ID"
],
"rows": 20024,
"filtered": 100,
"attached_condition": "("benchmark"."existsTT"."ID" is not null)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ass_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"assignmentQuery",
"joshTest",
"testTwo",
"joshTest3",
"anodaTEst",
"uniqueness",
"uutt",
"AssignmentValue",
"AssociatedObjectID",
"AssociatedObject"
],
"key": "testTwo",
"used_key_parts": [
"AssociatedObjectID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.existsTT.ID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "((("benchmark"."ass_"."IsDeleted" = 0) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssociatedObjectClass" = 'MVRep') and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentSubType" = 'ListID')) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" is not
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "list_stores",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"StoreList",
"MVListID",
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVListID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVListID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" = "benchmark"."list_stores"."MVListID")"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ent_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVStoreID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "exists(/* select#2 */ select "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID" from "benchmark"."TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62" "existsTT" where ("benchmark"."ent_"."MVStoreID" = "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID"
"attached_subqueries": [
{
"dependent": true,
"cacheable": false,
"query_block": {
"select_id": 2,
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"st"
],
"key": "st",
"used_key_parts": [
"StoreID"
],
"key_length": "5",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 2,
"filtered": 100
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}


show create table syntax for all involved tables:



CREATE TABLE "MVAssignment" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"ClassName" enum('MVAssignment') DEFAULT 'MVAssignment',
"Created" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"LastEdited" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"AssignmentType" enum('MVCustomField','MVBrand','MVStore','MVList','MVRetailer','MVBillingCode','MVRep','MVTagName','MVSkillAndCapability') DEFAULT 'MVCustomField',
"AssignmentSubType" enum('SkillsAndCapabilities','SkillAndCapabilityID','allSkillsAndCapabilities','BrandID','Brands','allBrands','CustomFields','CustomFieldNameID','CustomFieldValue','allCustomFields','BillingCodes','BillingCodeID','allBillingCodes','Lists','ListID','allLists','RepID','allReps','Reps','RepsLetterRange','Stores','StoresLetterRange','StoresState','StoresZip','StoreZip','StoresCity','StoreID','allStores','StoreZips','StoreZipsRange','allStoreZips','StoresByNumber','StoreNumberID','allStoresByNumber','Retailers','RetailersLetterRange','RetailerID','allRetailers','Tags','TagNameID','TagValue','allTags') DEFAULT 'SkillsAndCapabilities',
"AssignmentValue" varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
"AssociatedObjectClass" enum('MVmPlan','MVRep','MVSalesToolBucket','MVUsergroup','MVAlert','MVItemLevelOverride') DEFAULT 'MVmPlan',
"AssociatedObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"IsDeleted" tinyint(1) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerObjectClass" enum('MVEntityUser') DEFAULT 'MVEntityUser',
"OwnerObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerUsergroupID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"UniquenessHash" varchar(32) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "OwnerObject" ("OwnerObjectClass","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "assignmentQuery" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","AssignmentSubType"),
KEY "joshTest" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted"),
KEY "testTwo" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted"),
KEY "joshTest3" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "anodaTEst" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","AssignmentValue"),
KEY "uniqueness" ("IsDeleted","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentType","AssociatedObjectID","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "uutt" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "AssignmentValue" ("AssignmentValue"),
KEY "AssociatedObjectID" ("AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "OwnerObjectID" ("OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "AssociatedObject" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "ClassName" ("ClassName"),
KEY "rickJames" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted")
)

CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE "TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c" (
"ID" int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
KEY "ID" ("ID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVList_Stores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVListID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "StoreList" ("MVStoreID","MVListID"),
KEY "MVListID" ("MVListID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVMasterEntityID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "MVMasterEntityID" ("MVMasterEntityID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)


The slow query log for the create table syntax is the following



2018-06-21 13:32:25 benchmark[benchmark] @  [10.0.0.214]    00:00:15    00:00:00    0   8048999 benchmark   0   0   1548456745
/* queryTime - 0.8239 seconds */
↵↵CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611cfe97d6fc08d6242f403e3317551 (repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID, ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID/*, count(ass_.AssociatedObjectID) as assignmentCount*/ , 1 as assignmentCount FROM MVAssignment AS ass_ JOIN TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT on existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
/* GROUP BY ass_.AssociatedObjectID, ent_.MVStoreID*/ 42994


I've rearranged the query a little bit simplified it a bit for testing (takes 7 seconds but only one column is selected / created on the temp table)...



SELECT  mvas.MVStoreID AS StoreID
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN MVList_Stores AS list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores mvas ON mvas.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT ID
FROM TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT
WHERE existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
)
AND ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0 ;


slightly different explain



1   PRIMARY ass_    ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,joshTest3,uniqueness,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObject,rickJames    uniqueness  2   const,const 27457   Using index condition; Using where
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 114 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY mvas ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 benchmark.ass_.AssociatedObjectID 1 NULL


So, I would normally be thinking , well this is as fast as I can get it ... but if I do a super simple query like this...



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611rcfe97ed6fc08d6242f403e3d3r1r74d5dd51 (
StoreID INT NOT NULL
) engine=memory AS
SELECT MVStoreID FROM MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_;


which puts 4 million rows in a temp table in < 1 sec ... it makes me think there is some way I can arrange my query so that it builds the temp table in a similar time that it takes to run the underlying query. Should I give it up ?










share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 13 mins ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
















  • also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:24











  • I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:53











  • I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 18:49











  • What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:15











  • Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:22
















0












0








0








I'm trying to get to the bottom of what I'm thinking is a performance issue when creating in memory temporary tables. The underlying query I have looks to me to be pretty well optimized. The explain is below the query. The temporary table it builds has ~4Million rows. The query (with no cache specified) runs in 150 ms, the creation of the table takes 15 seconds. Couple other interesting things I'm seeing. I'd thought maybe I needed a covering index for the underlying query that builds the table but don't think that's really possible when I'm selecting from two tables that are joined so I replaced the query with a simpler version, just selecting the StoreID. Run time was the same ... ~15 seconds to build the temp table. After the table was created I did a "create table like " and then did the index build. It took about 2 seconds which also doesn't make sense to me. Anyone got any thoughts?



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTTe5f0f36ca5fec1d49a75d5cb5d88233f 
(repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory
AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID,
ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID, 1 as assignmentCount
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN TTTf122b1fd3249346930db2dff0c43b022 existsTT
ON existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores
ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
AND EXISTS
(
SELECT StoreID
from TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62 existsTT
where ent_.MVStoreID=existsTT.StoreID
) ;
/* queryTime - 15.1777 seconds */


The explain is as follows



id  select_type table   type    possible_keys   key key_len ref rows    Extra
1 PRIMARY existsTT ALL ID 20024 Using where
1 PRIMARY ass_ ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,testTwo,joshTest3,anodaTEst,uniqueness,uutt,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObjectID,AssociatedObject testTwo 4 benchmark.existsTT.ID 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY ent_ ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using where; Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT ref st st 5 benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID 2


Here is the json explain



{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ALL",
"possible_keys": [
"ID"
],
"rows": 20024,
"filtered": 100,
"attached_condition": "("benchmark"."existsTT"."ID" is not null)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ass_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"assignmentQuery",
"joshTest",
"testTwo",
"joshTest3",
"anodaTEst",
"uniqueness",
"uutt",
"AssignmentValue",
"AssociatedObjectID",
"AssociatedObject"
],
"key": "testTwo",
"used_key_parts": [
"AssociatedObjectID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.existsTT.ID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "((("benchmark"."ass_"."IsDeleted" = 0) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssociatedObjectClass" = 'MVRep') and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentSubType" = 'ListID')) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" is not
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "list_stores",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"StoreList",
"MVListID",
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVListID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVListID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" = "benchmark"."list_stores"."MVListID")"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ent_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVStoreID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "exists(/* select#2 */ select "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID" from "benchmark"."TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62" "existsTT" where ("benchmark"."ent_"."MVStoreID" = "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID"
"attached_subqueries": [
{
"dependent": true,
"cacheable": false,
"query_block": {
"select_id": 2,
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"st"
],
"key": "st",
"used_key_parts": [
"StoreID"
],
"key_length": "5",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 2,
"filtered": 100
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}


show create table syntax for all involved tables:



CREATE TABLE "MVAssignment" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"ClassName" enum('MVAssignment') DEFAULT 'MVAssignment',
"Created" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"LastEdited" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"AssignmentType" enum('MVCustomField','MVBrand','MVStore','MVList','MVRetailer','MVBillingCode','MVRep','MVTagName','MVSkillAndCapability') DEFAULT 'MVCustomField',
"AssignmentSubType" enum('SkillsAndCapabilities','SkillAndCapabilityID','allSkillsAndCapabilities','BrandID','Brands','allBrands','CustomFields','CustomFieldNameID','CustomFieldValue','allCustomFields','BillingCodes','BillingCodeID','allBillingCodes','Lists','ListID','allLists','RepID','allReps','Reps','RepsLetterRange','Stores','StoresLetterRange','StoresState','StoresZip','StoreZip','StoresCity','StoreID','allStores','StoreZips','StoreZipsRange','allStoreZips','StoresByNumber','StoreNumberID','allStoresByNumber','Retailers','RetailersLetterRange','RetailerID','allRetailers','Tags','TagNameID','TagValue','allTags') DEFAULT 'SkillsAndCapabilities',
"AssignmentValue" varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
"AssociatedObjectClass" enum('MVmPlan','MVRep','MVSalesToolBucket','MVUsergroup','MVAlert','MVItemLevelOverride') DEFAULT 'MVmPlan',
"AssociatedObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"IsDeleted" tinyint(1) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerObjectClass" enum('MVEntityUser') DEFAULT 'MVEntityUser',
"OwnerObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerUsergroupID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"UniquenessHash" varchar(32) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "OwnerObject" ("OwnerObjectClass","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "assignmentQuery" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","AssignmentSubType"),
KEY "joshTest" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted"),
KEY "testTwo" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted"),
KEY "joshTest3" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "anodaTEst" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","AssignmentValue"),
KEY "uniqueness" ("IsDeleted","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentType","AssociatedObjectID","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "uutt" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "AssignmentValue" ("AssignmentValue"),
KEY "AssociatedObjectID" ("AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "OwnerObjectID" ("OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "AssociatedObject" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "ClassName" ("ClassName"),
KEY "rickJames" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted")
)

CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE "TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c" (
"ID" int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
KEY "ID" ("ID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVList_Stores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVListID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "StoreList" ("MVStoreID","MVListID"),
KEY "MVListID" ("MVListID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVMasterEntityID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "MVMasterEntityID" ("MVMasterEntityID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)


The slow query log for the create table syntax is the following



2018-06-21 13:32:25 benchmark[benchmark] @  [10.0.0.214]    00:00:15    00:00:00    0   8048999 benchmark   0   0   1548456745
/* queryTime - 0.8239 seconds */
↵↵CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611cfe97d6fc08d6242f403e3317551 (repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID, ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID/*, count(ass_.AssociatedObjectID) as assignmentCount*/ , 1 as assignmentCount FROM MVAssignment AS ass_ JOIN TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT on existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
/* GROUP BY ass_.AssociatedObjectID, ent_.MVStoreID*/ 42994


I've rearranged the query a little bit simplified it a bit for testing (takes 7 seconds but only one column is selected / created on the temp table)...



SELECT  mvas.MVStoreID AS StoreID
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN MVList_Stores AS list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores mvas ON mvas.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT ID
FROM TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT
WHERE existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
)
AND ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0 ;


slightly different explain



1   PRIMARY ass_    ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,joshTest3,uniqueness,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObject,rickJames    uniqueness  2   const,const 27457   Using index condition; Using where
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 114 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY mvas ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 benchmark.ass_.AssociatedObjectID 1 NULL


So, I would normally be thinking , well this is as fast as I can get it ... but if I do a super simple query like this...



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611rcfe97ed6fc08d6242f403e3d3r1r74d5dd51 (
StoreID INT NOT NULL
) engine=memory AS
SELECT MVStoreID FROM MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_;


which puts 4 million rows in a temp table in < 1 sec ... it makes me think there is some way I can arrange my query so that it builds the temp table in a similar time that it takes to run the underlying query. Should I give it up ?










share|improve this question
















I'm trying to get to the bottom of what I'm thinking is a performance issue when creating in memory temporary tables. The underlying query I have looks to me to be pretty well optimized. The explain is below the query. The temporary table it builds has ~4Million rows. The query (with no cache specified) runs in 150 ms, the creation of the table takes 15 seconds. Couple other interesting things I'm seeing. I'd thought maybe I needed a covering index for the underlying query that builds the table but don't think that's really possible when I'm selecting from two tables that are joined so I replaced the query with a simpler version, just selecting the StoreID. Run time was the same ... ~15 seconds to build the temp table. After the table was created I did a "create table like " and then did the index build. It took about 2 seconds which also doesn't make sense to me. Anyone got any thoughts?



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTTe5f0f36ca5fec1d49a75d5cb5d88233f 
(repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory
AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID,
ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID, 1 as assignmentCount
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN TTTf122b1fd3249346930db2dff0c43b022 existsTT
ON existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores
ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
AND EXISTS
(
SELECT StoreID
from TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62 existsTT
where ent_.MVStoreID=existsTT.StoreID
) ;
/* queryTime - 15.1777 seconds */


The explain is as follows



id  select_type table   type    possible_keys   key key_len ref rows    Extra
1 PRIMARY existsTT ALL ID 20024 Using where
1 PRIMARY ass_ ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,testTwo,joshTest3,anodaTEst,uniqueness,uutt,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObjectID,AssociatedObject testTwo 4 benchmark.existsTT.ID 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 1 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY ent_ ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using where; Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT ref st st 5 benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID 2


Here is the json explain



{
"query_block": {
"select_id": 1,
"nested_loop": [
{
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ALL",
"possible_keys": [
"ID"
],
"rows": 20024,
"filtered": 100,
"attached_condition": "("benchmark"."existsTT"."ID" is not null)"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ass_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"assignmentQuery",
"joshTest",
"testTwo",
"joshTest3",
"anodaTEst",
"uniqueness",
"uutt",
"AssignmentValue",
"AssociatedObjectID",
"AssociatedObject"
],
"key": "testTwo",
"used_key_parts": [
"AssociatedObjectID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.existsTT.ID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "((("benchmark"."ass_"."IsDeleted" = 0) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssociatedObjectClass" = 'MVRep') and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentSubType" = 'ListID')) and ("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" is not
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "list_stores",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"StoreList",
"MVListID",
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVListID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVListID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"index_condition": "("benchmark"."ass_"."AssignmentValue" = "benchmark"."list_stores"."MVListID")"
}
},
{
"table": {
"table_name": "ent_",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key": "MVStoreID",
"used_key_parts": [
"MVStoreID"
],
"key_length": "4",
"ref": [
"benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 1,
"filtered": 100,
"using_index": true,
"attached_condition": "exists(/* select#2 */ select "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID" from "benchmark"."TTT08d81ab1ab02c079ffebae286c342e62" "existsTT" where ("benchmark"."ent_"."MVStoreID" = "benchmark"."existsTT"."StoreID"
"attached_subqueries": [
{
"dependent": true,
"cacheable": false,
"query_block": {
"select_id": 2,
"table": {
"table_name": "existsTT",
"access_type": "ref",
"possible_keys": [
"st"
],
"key": "st",
"used_key_parts": [
"StoreID"
],
"key_length": "5",
"ref": [
"benchmark.ent_.MVStoreID"
],
"rows": 2,
"filtered": 100
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}


show create table syntax for all involved tables:



CREATE TABLE "MVAssignment" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"ClassName" enum('MVAssignment') DEFAULT 'MVAssignment',
"Created" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"LastEdited" datetime DEFAULT NULL,
"AssignmentType" enum('MVCustomField','MVBrand','MVStore','MVList','MVRetailer','MVBillingCode','MVRep','MVTagName','MVSkillAndCapability') DEFAULT 'MVCustomField',
"AssignmentSubType" enum('SkillsAndCapabilities','SkillAndCapabilityID','allSkillsAndCapabilities','BrandID','Brands','allBrands','CustomFields','CustomFieldNameID','CustomFieldValue','allCustomFields','BillingCodes','BillingCodeID','allBillingCodes','Lists','ListID','allLists','RepID','allReps','Reps','RepsLetterRange','Stores','StoresLetterRange','StoresState','StoresZip','StoreZip','StoresCity','StoreID','allStores','StoreZips','StoreZipsRange','allStoreZips','StoresByNumber','StoreNumberID','allStoresByNumber','Retailers','RetailersLetterRange','RetailerID','allRetailers','Tags','TagNameID','TagValue','allTags') DEFAULT 'SkillsAndCapabilities',
"AssignmentValue" varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
"AssociatedObjectClass" enum('MVmPlan','MVRep','MVSalesToolBucket','MVUsergroup','MVAlert','MVItemLevelOverride') DEFAULT 'MVmPlan',
"AssociatedObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"IsDeleted" tinyint(1) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerObjectClass" enum('MVEntityUser') DEFAULT 'MVEntityUser',
"OwnerObjectID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"OwnerUsergroupID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"UniquenessHash" varchar(32) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "OwnerObject" ("OwnerObjectClass","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "assignmentQuery" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","AssignmentSubType"),
KEY "joshTest" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted"),
KEY "testTwo" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted"),
KEY "joshTest3" ("AssignmentValue","AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "anodaTEst" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted","AssignmentValue"),
KEY "uniqueness" ("IsDeleted","AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentType","AssociatedObjectID","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "uutt" ("AssociatedObjectID","AssignmentValue","AssignmentSubType","AssociatedObjectClass","IsDeleted","UniquenessHash"),
KEY "AssignmentValue" ("AssignmentValue"),
KEY "AssociatedObjectID" ("AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "OwnerObjectID" ("OwnerObjectID"),
KEY "AssociatedObject" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssociatedObjectID"),
KEY "ClassName" ("ClassName"),
KEY "rickJames" ("AssociatedObjectClass","AssignmentSubType","IsDeleted")
)

CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE "TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c" (
"ID" int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
KEY "ID" ("ID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVList_Stores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVListID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "StoreList" ("MVStoreID","MVListID"),
KEY "MVListID" ("MVListID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)

CREATE TABLE "MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores" (
"ID" int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
"MVMasterEntityID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
"MVStoreID" int(11) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
PRIMARY KEY ("ID"),
KEY "MVMasterEntityID" ("MVMasterEntityID"),
KEY "MVStoreID" ("MVStoreID")
)


The slow query log for the create table syntax is the following



2018-06-21 13:32:25 benchmark[benchmark] @  [10.0.0.214]    00:00:15    00:00:00    0   8048999 benchmark   0   0   1548456745
/* queryTime - 0.8239 seconds */
↵↵CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611cfe97d6fc08d6242f403e3317551 (repID INT,StoreID INT,EntityID INT , INDEX st (`StoreID`) ) engine=memory AS
SELECT ass_.AssociatedObjectID AS repID, ass_.OwnerUsergroupID AS EntityID, ent_.MVStoreID AS StoreID/*, count(ass_.AssociatedObjectID) as assignmentCount*/ , 1 as assignmentCount FROM MVAssignment AS ass_ JOIN TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT on existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID JOIN MVList_Stores as list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_
ON ent_.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0
/* GROUP BY ass_.AssociatedObjectID, ent_.MVStoreID*/ 42994


I've rearranged the query a little bit simplified it a bit for testing (takes 7 seconds but only one column is selected / created on the temp table)...



SELECT  mvas.MVStoreID AS StoreID
FROM MVAssignment AS ass_
JOIN MVList_Stores AS list_stores ON ass_.AssignmentValue = list_stores.MVListID
JOIN MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores mvas ON mvas.MVStoreID = list_stores.MVStoreID
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT ID
FROM TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c existsTT
WHERE existsTT.ID = ass_.AssociatedObjectID
)
AND ass_.AssociatedObjectClass = 'MVRep'
AND ass_.AssignmentSubType = 'ListID'
AND ass_.IsDeleted = 0 ;


slightly different explain



1   PRIMARY ass_    ref assignmentQuery,joshTest,joshTest3,uniqueness,AssignmentValue,AssociatedObject,rickJames    uniqueness  2   const,const 27457   Using index condition; Using where
1 PRIMARY list_stores ref StoreList,MVListID,MVStoreID MVListID 4 benchmark.ass_.AssignmentValue 114 Using index condition
1 PRIMARY mvas ref MVStoreID MVStoreID 4 benchmark.list_stores.MVStoreID 1 Using index
2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY existsTT eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 benchmark.ass_.AssociatedObjectID 1 NULL


So, I would normally be thinking , well this is as fast as I can get it ... but if I do a super simple query like this...



CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TTT4611rcfe97ed6fc08d6242f403e3d3r1r74d5dd51 (
StoreID INT NOT NULL
) engine=memory AS
SELECT MVStoreID FROM MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores ent_;


which puts 4 million rows in a temp table in < 1 sec ... it makes me think there is some way I can arrange my query so that it builds the temp table in a similar time that it takes to run the underlying query. Should I give it up ?







mysql performance temp-tables






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jun 25 '18 at 4:43









Rick James

41.6k22258




41.6k22258










asked Jun 20 '18 at 15:33









JoshJosh

215




215





bumped to the homepage by Community 13 mins ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.







bumped to the homepage by Community 13 mins ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.















  • also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:24











  • I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:53











  • I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 18:49











  • What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:15











  • Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:22





















  • also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:24











  • I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 16:53











  • I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

    – Josh
    Jun 20 '18 at 18:49











  • What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:15











  • Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 18:22



















also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 16:24





also tried creating in innodb. That was slower... 18 seconds.

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 16:24













I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 16:53





I take back the comment about the super simple select taking the same amount of time. I just ran it again and it took .01 seconds.

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 16:53













I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 18:49





I also changed the query so that I was getting back 20K is records. 15 seconds to create...

– Josh
Jun 20 '18 at 18:49













What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 18:15





What are the slowlog column headings? In particular, what are 8048999 and 1548456745? I'll guess one is "rows examined". How many rows in each table?

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 18:15













Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 18:22







Some indexes are redundant. When you have INDEX(a) and INDEX(a,b), drop of the former. Drop joshTest and AssociatedObjectID and AssignmentValue. (This won't solve the problem; it's just a cleanup.)

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 18:22












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














Did you set this suitable large before the CREATE?



SET max_heap_table_size = ...;


15 seconds to read 4 million rows is not necessarily "slow".



If you had the slowlog turned on, "Rows examined" would be an interesting number.



Your table ass_ needs this composite index (in any order):



INDEX(AssociatedObjectClass, AssignmentSubType, IsDeleted)


If that is not sufficient, please provide the new EXPLAIN and SHOW CREATE TABLE for each table.



More



Since the Optimizer seems determined to start with existsTT, my index is not useful.



(Please don't reuse the alias existsTT; it is confusing.)



If the IDs in TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c are distinct, please replace its index with PRIMARY KEY(ID).



Many columns are NULLable. And the EXPLAIN seems to be doing tests on such. Consider changing most columns to be NOT NULL






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 13:38











  • Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 14:01











  • @Josh - See the additions I made.

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 20:08











  • Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 1:32











  • Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 3:45













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "182"
};
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: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f210152%2fmysql-memory-temp-table-creation-slow%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









0














Did you set this suitable large before the CREATE?



SET max_heap_table_size = ...;


15 seconds to read 4 million rows is not necessarily "slow".



If you had the slowlog turned on, "Rows examined" would be an interesting number.



Your table ass_ needs this composite index (in any order):



INDEX(AssociatedObjectClass, AssignmentSubType, IsDeleted)


If that is not sufficient, please provide the new EXPLAIN and SHOW CREATE TABLE for each table.



More



Since the Optimizer seems determined to start with existsTT, my index is not useful.



(Please don't reuse the alias existsTT; it is confusing.)



If the IDs in TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c are distinct, please replace its index with PRIMARY KEY(ID).



Many columns are NULLable. And the EXPLAIN seems to be doing tests on such. Consider changing most columns to be NOT NULL






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 13:38











  • Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 14:01











  • @Josh - See the additions I made.

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 20:08











  • Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 1:32











  • Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 3:45


















0














Did you set this suitable large before the CREATE?



SET max_heap_table_size = ...;


15 seconds to read 4 million rows is not necessarily "slow".



If you had the slowlog turned on, "Rows examined" would be an interesting number.



Your table ass_ needs this composite index (in any order):



INDEX(AssociatedObjectClass, AssignmentSubType, IsDeleted)


If that is not sufficient, please provide the new EXPLAIN and SHOW CREATE TABLE for each table.



More



Since the Optimizer seems determined to start with existsTT, my index is not useful.



(Please don't reuse the alias existsTT; it is confusing.)



If the IDs in TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c are distinct, please replace its index with PRIMARY KEY(ID).



Many columns are NULLable. And the EXPLAIN seems to be doing tests on such. Consider changing most columns to be NOT NULL






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 13:38











  • Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 14:01











  • @Josh - See the additions I made.

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 20:08











  • Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 1:32











  • Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 3:45
















0












0








0







Did you set this suitable large before the CREATE?



SET max_heap_table_size = ...;


15 seconds to read 4 million rows is not necessarily "slow".



If you had the slowlog turned on, "Rows examined" would be an interesting number.



Your table ass_ needs this composite index (in any order):



INDEX(AssociatedObjectClass, AssignmentSubType, IsDeleted)


If that is not sufficient, please provide the new EXPLAIN and SHOW CREATE TABLE for each table.



More



Since the Optimizer seems determined to start with existsTT, my index is not useful.



(Please don't reuse the alias existsTT; it is confusing.)



If the IDs in TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c are distinct, please replace its index with PRIMARY KEY(ID).



Many columns are NULLable. And the EXPLAIN seems to be doing tests on such. Consider changing most columns to be NOT NULL






share|improve this answer















Did you set this suitable large before the CREATE?



SET max_heap_table_size = ...;


15 seconds to read 4 million rows is not necessarily "slow".



If you had the slowlog turned on, "Rows examined" would be an interesting number.



Your table ass_ needs this composite index (in any order):



INDEX(AssociatedObjectClass, AssignmentSubType, IsDeleted)


If that is not sufficient, please provide the new EXPLAIN and SHOW CREATE TABLE for each table.



More



Since the Optimizer seems determined to start with existsTT, my index is not useful.



(Please don't reuse the alias existsTT; it is confusing.)



If the IDs in TTT97a84e6f7eaa4bf3b2fbb8491517324c are distinct, please replace its index with PRIMARY KEY(ID).



Many columns are NULLable. And the EXPLAIN seems to be doing tests on such. Consider changing most columns to be NOT NULL







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Jun 21 '18 at 20:05

























answered Jun 20 '18 at 20:43









Rick JamesRick James

41.6k22258




41.6k22258













  • Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 13:38











  • Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 14:01











  • @Josh - See the additions I made.

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 20:08











  • Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 1:32











  • Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 3:45





















  • Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 13:38











  • Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

    – Josh
    Jun 21 '18 at 14:01











  • @Josh - See the additions I made.

    – Rick James
    Jun 21 '18 at 20:08











  • Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 1:32











  • Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

    – Josh
    Jun 22 '18 at 3:45



















Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

– Josh
Jun 21 '18 at 13:38





Hi Rick. Thanks for you help. I added the index but it didn't help performance. The explain is still the same. I have the max_heap_table_size set to SET SESSION max_heap_table_size=134217728000; which I think should be plenty big (not getting the table is full error). I've added both the slow query log and the table explain to my original post.

– Josh
Jun 21 '18 at 13:38













Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

– Josh
Jun 21 '18 at 14:01





Here is something else interesting. I can take out the join to the MVMasterEntity_AttachedStores table and the temp table creation takes 8 seconds but examines almost 50% more rows... 12Million

– Josh
Jun 21 '18 at 14:01













@Josh - See the additions I made.

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 20:08





@Josh - See the additions I made.

– Rick James
Jun 21 '18 at 20:08













Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

– Josh
Jun 22 '18 at 1:32





Thanks Rick. I'll make those adjustments and see what happens. Question for you... how could you tell from the explain that null was being tested ?

– Josh
Jun 22 '18 at 1:32













Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

– Josh
Jun 22 '18 at 3:45







Ok, I made the adjustments but I'm still stuck @ 15 seconds. I also rearranged the query so that the join on the TTT... table turned into an exists in the where statement. That got the optimizer to use the primary key you suggested and also got it off of the first thing the optimizer is looking at. still 15 seconds. though. Is it possible that something in this query is 'going to disk' and I'm just not seeing it in any of the debug tools I've used so far. Any other mysql settings that I could be missing ? What about me selecting from two tables... does that == no covering index?

– Josh
Jun 22 '18 at 3:45




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!


  • 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.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f210152%2fmysql-memory-temp-table-creation-slow%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

Liste der Baudenkmale in Friedland (Mecklenburg)

Single-Malt-Whisky

Czorneboh