MySQL 用 limit 為什么會(huì)影響性能?
一,前言?
首先說明一下MySQL的版本:
mysql> select version();
+-----------+
| version() |
+-----------+
| 5.7.17 |
+-----------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)
表結(jié)構(gòu):
mysql> desc test;
+--------+---------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| Field ?| Type ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| Null | Key | Default | Extra ? ? ? ? ?|
+--------+---------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
| id ? ? | bigint(20) unsigned | NO ? | PRI | NULL ? ?| auto_increment |
| val ? ?| int(10) unsigned ? ?| NO ? | MUL | 0 ? ? ? | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?|
| source | int(10) unsigned ? ?| NO ? | ? ? | 0 ? ? ? | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?|
+--------+---------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+
3 rows in set (0.00 sec)
id為自增主鍵,val為非唯一索引。
灌入大量數(shù)據(jù),共500萬:
mysql> select count(*) from test;
+----------+
| count(*) |
+----------+
| 5242882 |
+----------+
1 row in set (4.25 sec)
我們知道,當(dāng)limit offset rows中的offset很大時(shí),會(huì)出現(xiàn)效率問題:
mysql> select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5;
+---------+-----+--------+
| id ? ? ?| val | source |
+---------+-----+--------+
| 3327622 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327632 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327642 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327652 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327662 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
+---------+-----+--------+
5 rows in set (15.98 sec)
為了達(dá)到相同的目的,我們一般會(huì)改寫成如下語句:
mysql> select * from test a inner join (select id from test where val=4 limit 300000,5) b on a.id=b.id;
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| id | val | source | id |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| 3327622 | 4 | 4 | 3327622 |
| 3327632 | 4 | 4 | 3327632 |
| 3327642 | 4 | 4 | 3327642 |
| 3327652 | 4 | 4 | 3327652 |
| 3327662 | 4 | 4 | 3327662 |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
5 rows in set (0.38 sec)
時(shí)間相差很明顯。
為什么會(huì)出現(xiàn)上面的結(jié)果?我們看一下select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5;的查詢過程:
查詢到索引葉子節(jié)點(diǎn)數(shù)據(jù)。
根據(jù)葉子節(jié)點(diǎn)上的主鍵值去聚簇索引上查詢需要的全部字段值。
類似于下面這張圖:

像上面這樣,需要查詢300005次索引節(jié)點(diǎn),查詢300005次聚簇索引的數(shù)據(jù),最后再將結(jié)果過濾掉前300000條,取出最后5條。MySQL耗費(fèi)了大量隨機(jī)I/O在查詢聚簇索引的數(shù)據(jù)上,而有300000次隨機(jī)I/O查詢到的數(shù)據(jù)是不會(huì)出現(xiàn)在結(jié)果集當(dāng)中的。
肯定會(huì)有人問:既然一開始是利用索引的,為什么不先沿著索引葉子節(jié)點(diǎn)查詢到最后需要的5個(gè)節(jié)點(diǎn),然后再去聚簇索引中查詢實(shí)際數(shù)據(jù)。這樣只需要5次隨機(jī)I/O,類似于下面圖片的過程:

其實(shí)我也想問這個(gè)問題。
證實(shí)
下面我們實(shí)際操作一下來證實(shí)上述的推論:
為了證實(shí)select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5是掃描300005個(gè)索引節(jié)點(diǎn)和300005個(gè)聚簇索引上的數(shù)據(jù)節(jié)點(diǎn),我們需要知道MySQL有沒有辦法統(tǒng)計(jì)在一個(gè)sql中通過索引節(jié)點(diǎn)查詢數(shù)據(jù)節(jié)點(diǎn)的次數(shù)。我先試了Handler_read_*系列,很遺憾沒有一個(gè)變量能滿足條件。
我只能通過間接的方式來證實(shí):
InnoDB中有buffer pool。里面存有最近訪問過的數(shù)據(jù)頁,包括數(shù)據(jù)頁和索引頁。所以我們需要運(yùn)行兩個(gè)sql,來比較buffer pool中的數(shù)據(jù)頁的數(shù)量。預(yù)測(cè)結(jié)果是運(yùn)行select * from test a inner join (select id from test where val=4 limit 300000,5) b>之后,buffer pool中的數(shù)據(jù)頁的數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)少于對(duì)應(yīng)的數(shù)量,因?yàn)榍耙粋€(gè)sql只訪問5次數(shù)據(jù)頁,而后一個(gè)sql訪問300005次數(shù)據(jù)頁。select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5;
select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
Empty set (0.04 sec)可以看出,目前buffer pool中沒有關(guān)于test表的數(shù)據(jù)頁。
mysql> select * from test where val=4 limit 300000,5;
+---------+-----+--------+
| id ? ? ?| val | source |
+---------+-----+--------+
| 3327622 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327632 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327642 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327652 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
| 3327662 | ? 4 | ? ? ?4 |
+---------+-----+--------+
5 rows in set (26.19 sec)
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
+------------+----------+
| index_name | count(*) |
+------------+----------+
| PRIMARY ? ?| ? ? 4098 |
| val ? ? ? ?| ? ? ?208 |
+------------+----------+
2 rows in set (0.04 sec)可以看出,此時(shí)buffer pool中關(guān)于test表有4098個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)頁,208個(gè)索引頁。
select * from test a inner join (select id from test where val=4 limit 300000,5) b>為了防止上次試驗(yàn)的影響,我們需要清空buffer pool,重啟mysql。mysqladmin shutdown
/usr/local/bin/mysqld_safe &
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
Empty set (0.03 sec)
運(yùn)行sql: mysql> select * from test a inner join (select id from test where val=4 limit 300000,5) b on a.id=b.id;
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| id | val | source | id |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| 3327622 | 4 | 4 | 3327622 |
| 3327632 | 4 | 4 | 3327632 |
| 3327642 | 4 | 4 | 3327642 |
| 3327652 | 4 | 4 | 3327652 |
| 3327662 | 4 | 4 | 3327662 |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
5 rows in set (0.09 sec)
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
+------------+----------+
| index_name | count(*) |
+------------+----------+
| PRIMARY | 5 |
| val | 390 |
+------------+----------+
2 rows in set (0.03 sec)
我們可以看明顯的看出兩者的差別:第一個(gè)sql加載了4098個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)頁到buffer pool,而第二個(gè)sql只加載了5個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)頁到buffer pool。符合我們的預(yù)測(cè)。也證實(shí)了為什么第一個(gè)sql會(huì)慢:讀取大量的無用數(shù)據(jù)行(300000),最后卻拋棄掉。
而且這會(huì)造成一個(gè)問題:加載了很多熱點(diǎn)不是很高的數(shù)據(jù)頁到buffer pool,會(huì)造成buffer pool的污染,占用buffer pool的空間。
遇到的問題
mysqladmin shutdown
/usr/local/bin/mysqld_safe &
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
Empty set (0.03 sec)
mysql> select * from test a inner join (select id from test where val=4 limit 300000,5) b on a.id=b.id;
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| id | val | source | id |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
| 3327622 | 4 | 4 | 3327622 |
| 3327632 | 4 | 4 | 3327632 |
| 3327642 | 4 | 4 | 3327642 |
| 3327652 | 4 | 4 | 3327652 |
| 3327662 | 4 | 4 | 3327662 |
+---------+-----+--------+---------+
5 rows in set (0.09 sec)
mysql> select index_name,count(*) from information_schema.INNODB_BUFFER_PAGE where INDEX_NAME in('val','primary') and TABLE_NAME like '%test%' group by index_name;
+------------+----------+
| index_name | count(*) |
+------------+----------+
| PRIMARY | 5 |
| val | 390 |
+------------+----------+
2 rows in set (0.03 sec)
而且這會(huì)造成一個(gè)問題:加載了很多熱點(diǎn)不是很高的數(shù)據(jù)頁到buffer pool,會(huì)造成buffer pool的污染,占用buffer pool的空間。
遇到的問題
為了在每次重啟時(shí)確保清空buffer pool,我們需要關(guān)閉innodb_buffer_pool_dump_at_shutdown和innodb_buffer_pool_load_at_startup,這兩個(gè)選項(xiàng)能夠控制數(shù)據(jù)庫關(guān)閉時(shí)dump出buffer pool中的數(shù)據(jù)和在數(shù)據(jù)庫開啟時(shí)載入在磁盤上備份buffer pool的數(shù)據(jù)。
參考資料:
1.https://explainextended.com/2009/10/23/mysql-order-by-limit-performance-late-row-lookups/
2.https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/innodb-information-schema-buffer-pool-tables.html
最近面試BAT,整理一份面試資料《Java面試BATJ通關(guān)手冊(cè)》,覆蓋了Java核心技術(shù)、JVM、Java并發(fā)、SSM、微服務(wù)、數(shù)據(jù)庫、數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)等等。
獲取方式:點(diǎn)“在看”,關(guān)注公眾號(hào)并回復(fù)?Java?領(lǐng)取,更多內(nèi)容陸續(xù)奉上。
文章有幫助的話,在看,轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)吧。
謝謝支持喲 (*^__^*)


