From: Ananda Kumar (anandklgmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 02 2009 - 08:29:29 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

# Query_time: 0 Lock_time: 0 Rows_sent: 1 Rows_examined: 150
SELECT SUM(COUNTER_VALUE) FROM STO_LIS sl, SCAT_LIS sfl WHERE l.STO_LIS_ID
=sfl.LIS_ID AND sfl.CAT_ID = '-1';

This is what is there in the slow-query log

On 1/2/09, Baron Schwartz <baronxaprb.com> wrote:
>
> It executes in 0 sec when you run it. It might be in the query cache.
> Try it with SQL_NO_CACHE. But even then it might run faster than it
> did when it got logged in the slow log, because the table's data might
> be in memory and therefore faster to access.
>
> The point is that the slow query log shows you how long the statement
> took to execute at the time of logging. It doesn't say anything about
> how fast the query will execute at other times, or WHY it was a long
> query at the time of logging. It could be a lot of things including
> locking, other queries running at the same time, a background Patrol
> Read on your RAID controller, etc. That's why I asked you to paste
> the slow query log entry for this query.
>
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Ananda Kumar <anandklgmail.com> wrote:
> > mysql> explain SELECT SUM(COUNTER_VALUE) FROM STO_LIS sl,
> > -> SCAT_LIS sfl WHERE sl.STO_LIS_ID =
> > -> sfl.LIS_ID AND sfl.CAT_ID = '-1';
> >
> >
> +----+-------------+-------+------+-----------------------+-------------------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
> > | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys |
> > key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
> >
> +----+-------------+-------+------+-----------------------+-------------------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
> > | 1 | SIMPLE | sfl | ref | PRIMARY,sfcatlist_lst |
> > PRIMARY | 4 | const | 23 | Using index |
> > | 1 | SIMPLE | sl | ref | STO_LIST_UK | STO_LIS_UK |
> 4 |
> > sm15.sfl.lis_id | 1 | Using where |
> >
> +----+-------------+-------+------+-----------------------+-------------------+---------+---------------------+------+-------------+
> > 2 rows in set (0.31 sec)
> >
> > mysql> SELECT SUM(COUNTER_VALUE) FROM STORES_LISTING sl,
> > SFCATEGORY_LISTING sfl WHERE sl.STORES_LISTING_ID = sfl.LISTING_ID AND
> > sfl.CATEGORY_ID = '-1';
> > +--------------------+
> > | SUM(COUNTER_VALUE) |
> > +--------------------+
> > | NULL |
> > +--------------------+
> > 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/31/08, Baron Schwartz <baronxaprb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Ananda Kumar <anandklgmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi All,
> >> > I have enabled slow query log.
> >> > Generally this file will have sql's which take more than long-query
> time
> >> > to
> >> > execute and also sql's not using indexes.
> >> > But i see sql's which does not come under the above condition.
> >> > I have set the long-query time to 1 Sec .
> >> >
> >> > The query takes less than 1 sec to execute and also uses indexes, but
> >> > still
> >> > its recored in slow query log.
> >>
> >> What is the execution time shown in the slow query log?
> >>
> >> What is the query?
> >>
> >> If you can paste the whole log entry here, that would be good.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Baron Schwartz, Director of Consulting, Percona Inc.
> >> Our Blog: http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/
> >> Our Services: http://www.percona.com/services.html
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Baron Schwartz, Director of Consulting, Percona Inc.
> Our Blog: http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/
> Our Services: http://www.percona.com/services.html
>

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]