一尘不染

获取最高/最小的记录 每组

mysql

怎么做?

该问题的原标题是“ 在带有子查询的复杂查询中使用等级(@Rank:= @Rank + 1)-可以吗?
”,因为我一直在寻找使用等级的解决方案,但是现在我看到Bill所发布的解决方案是好多了。

原始问题:

我正在尝试组成一个查询,该查询将从给定定义顺序的每个组中获取最后一条记录:

SET @Rank=0;

select s.*
from (select GroupId, max(Rank) AS MaxRank
      from (select GroupId, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank 
            from Table
            order by OrderField
            ) as t
      group by GroupId) as t 
  join (
      select *, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank
      from Table
      order by OrderField
      ) as s 
  on t.GroupId = s.GroupId and t.MaxRank = s.Rank
order by OrderField

表达式@Rank := @Rank + 1通常用于等级,但对我来说,在2个子查询中使用时,它看起来可疑,但仅初始化一次。这样行吗?

其次,它将与一个被多次评估的子查询一起使用吗?像where(或having)子句中的子查询(另一种写上面的方法):

SET @Rank=0;

select Table.*, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank
from Table
having Rank = (select max(Rank) AS MaxRank
              from (select GroupId, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank 
                    from Table as t0
                    order by OrderField
                    ) as t
              where t.GroupId = table.GroupId
             )
order by OrderField

提前致谢!


阅读 178

收藏
2020-05-17

共1个答案

一尘不染

因此,您想获得OrderField每组最高的行吗?我会这样:

SELECT t1.*
FROM `Table` AS t1
LEFT OUTER JOIN `Table` AS t2
  ON t1.GroupId = t2.GroupId AND t1.OrderField < t2.OrderField
WHERE t2.GroupId IS NULL
ORDER BY t1.OrderField; // not needed! (note by Tomas)

Tomas EDIT: 如果同一组中有更多具有相同OrderField的记录,而您恰好需要其中之一,则可能需要扩展条件:

SELECT t1.*
FROM `Table` AS t1
LEFT OUTER JOIN `Table` AS t2
  ON t1.GroupId = t2.GroupId 
        AND (t1.OrderField < t2.OrderField 
         OR (t1.OrderField = t2.OrderField AND t1.Id < t2.Id))
WHERE t2.GroupId IS NULL

编辑结束。)

换句话说,以相同或更大的值返回t1没有其他行t2存在的行。当为NULL时,表示左外部联接未找到此类匹配项,因此在组中具有最大值。GroupId``OrderField``t2.*``t1``OrderField

没有等级,没有子查询。如果您在上拥有复合索引,这应该可以快速运行并使用“使用索引”优化对t2的访问(GroupId, OrderField)


关于性能,请参阅我对检索每个组中的最后一个记录的回答。我尝试了使用堆栈溢出数据转储的子查询方法和联接方法。区别非常明显:在我的测试中,join方法的运行速度提高了278倍。

重要的是您必须具有正确的索引以获得最佳结果!

关于使用@Rank变量的方法,它不能像您编写的那样起作用,因为在查询处理完第一个表之后,@ Rank的值不会重置为零。我给你看一个例子。

我插入了一些虚拟数据,其中一个额外的字段为null,但在我们知道每组最大的行上除外:

select * from `Table`;

+---------+------------+------+
| GroupId | OrderField | foo  |
+---------+------------+------+
|      10 |         10 | NULL |
|      10 |         20 | NULL |
|      10 |         30 | foo  |
|      20 |         40 | NULL |
|      20 |         50 | NULL |
|      20 |         60 | foo  |
+---------+------------+------+

我们可以证明,第一组的排名增加到三,第二组的排名增加到六,并且内部查询正确地返回了这些:

select GroupId, max(Rank) AS MaxRank
from (
  select GroupId, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank
  from `Table`
  order by OrderField) as t
group by GroupId

+---------+---------+
| GroupId | MaxRank |
+---------+---------+
|      10 |       3 |
|      20 |       6 |
+---------+---------+

现在,在没有连接条件的情况下运行查询,以强制所有行的笛卡尔积,并且我们还获取所有列:

select s.*, t.*
from (select GroupId, max(Rank) AS MaxRank
      from (select GroupId, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank 
            from `Table`
            order by OrderField
            ) as t
      group by GroupId) as t 
  join (
      select *, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank
      from `Table`
      order by OrderField
      ) as s 
  -- on t.GroupId = s.GroupId and t.MaxRank = s.Rank
order by OrderField;

+---------+---------+---------+------------+------+------+
| GroupId | MaxRank | GroupId | OrderField | foo  | Rank |
+---------+---------+---------+------------+------+------+
|      10 |       3 |      10 |         10 | NULL |    7 |
|      20 |       6 |      10 |         10 | NULL |    7 |
|      10 |       3 |      10 |         20 | NULL |    8 |
|      20 |       6 |      10 |         20 | NULL |    8 |
|      20 |       6 |      10 |         30 | foo  |    9 |
|      10 |       3 |      10 |         30 | foo  |    9 |
|      10 |       3 |      20 |         40 | NULL |   10 |
|      20 |       6 |      20 |         40 | NULL |   10 |
|      10 |       3 |      20 |         50 | NULL |   11 |
|      20 |       6 |      20 |         50 | NULL |   11 |
|      20 |       6 |      20 |         60 | foo  |   12 |
|      10 |       3 |      20 |         60 | foo  |   12 |
+---------+---------+---------+------------+------+------+

从上面我们可以看到每组的最大排名是正确的,但是@Rank在处理第二个派生表时继续增加,直到7或更高。因此,第二个派生表中的等级根本不会与第一个派生表中的等级完全重叠。

您必须添加另一个派生表,以在处理两个表之间强制@Rank重置为零(并希望优化器不要更改其评估表的顺序,或者使用STRAIGHT_JOIN来防止这种情况):

select s.*
from (select GroupId, max(Rank) AS MaxRank
      from (select GroupId, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank 
            from `Table`
            order by OrderField
            ) as t
      group by GroupId) as t 
  join (select @Rank := 0) r -- RESET @Rank TO ZERO HERE
  join (
      select *, @Rank := @Rank + 1 AS Rank
      from `Table`
      order by OrderField
      ) as s 
  on t.GroupId = s.GroupId and t.MaxRank = s.Rank
order by OrderField;

+---------+------------+------+------+
| GroupId | OrderField | foo  | Rank |
+---------+------------+------+------+
|      10 |         30 | foo  |    3 |
|      20 |         60 | foo  |    6 |
+---------+------------+------+------+

但是,此查询的优化很糟糕。它不能使用任何索引,它会创建两个临时表,对它们进行困难的排序,甚至使用联接缓冲区,因为它在联接临时表时也无法使用索引。这是来自EXPLAIN以下示例的输出:

+----+-------------+------------+--------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+---------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table      | type   | possible_keys | key  | key_len | ref  | rows | Extra                           |
+----+-------------+------------+--------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+---------------------------------+
|  1 | PRIMARY     | <derived4> | system | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    1 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
|  1 | PRIMARY     | <derived2> | ALL    | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    2 |                                 |
|  1 | PRIMARY     | <derived5> | ALL    | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    6 | Using where; Using join buffer  |
|  5 | DERIVED     | Table      | ALL    | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    6 | Using filesort                  |
|  4 | DERIVED     | NULL       | NULL   | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL | NULL | No tables used                  |
|  2 | DERIVED     | <derived3> | ALL    | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    6 | Using temporary; Using filesort |
|  3 | DERIVED     | Table      | ALL    | NULL          | NULL | NULL    | NULL |    6 | Using filesort                  |
+----+-------------+------------+--------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+---------------------------------+

而我使用左外部联接的解决方案优化得更好。它不使用临时表,甚至不使用报告"Using index",这意味着它可以仅使用索引来解决联接,而无需处理数据。

+----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+---------+---------+-----------------+------+--------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key     | key_len | ref             | rows | Extra                    |
+----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+---------+---------+-----------------+------+--------------------------+
|  1 | SIMPLE      | t1    | ALL  | NULL          | NULL    | NULL    | NULL            |    6 | Using filesort           |
|  1 | SIMPLE      | t2    | ref  | GroupId       | GroupId | 5       | test.t1.GroupId |    1 | Using where; Using index |
+----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+---------+---------+-----------------+------+--------------------------+

您可能会读到人们在其博客上宣称“加入会使SQL变慢”的说法,但这是无稽之谈。最差的优化会使SQL变慢。

2020-05-17