SQL - 为复杂动态行选择查询

问题描述:

我需要根据搜索条件从下表中检索ListingId。请帮助的最佳方式以检索下面SQL - 为复杂动态行选择查询

注意的条件查询:ListingId可以有任意数量ExtrafieldId的,所以搜索ListingId是基于动态ExtrafieldId

If (ExtrafieldId = 1 and Value = 1) => OUTPUT - 20, 22 
If (ExtrafieldId = 1 and Value = 1) and (ExtrafieldId = 2 and Value = 7) => OUTPUT - 21 
If (ExtrafieldId =4and Value = 1999) => OUTPUT - 20, 21, 23 

等等...

ListingId ExtraFieldId Value  
20 1 1  
20 2 4  
20 3   
20 4 1990  
21 1 2  
21 2 7  
21 3   
21 4 1990  
22 1 1  
22 2 4  
22 3   
22 4 2000  
23 1 NULL  
23 2 NULL  
23 4 1999  

SELECT 
     t1.ListingID 
FROM 
     TableX AS t1 

    JOIN        --- 2nd JOIN 
     TableX AS t2 
    ON 
     t2.ListingID = t1.ListingID 

    JOIN        --- 3rd JOIN 
     TableX AS t3 
    ON 
     t3.ListingID = t1.ListingID 

WHERE 
     (t1.ExtraFieldID, t1.Value) = (@ExtraFieldID_search1, @Value_search1) 

         --- 2nd condition 
    AND 
     (t2.ExtraFieldID, t2.Value) = (@ExtraFieldID_search2, @Value_search2) 

         --- 3rd condition 
    AND 
     (t3.ExtraFieldID, t3.Value) = (@ExtraFieldID_search3, @Value_search3) 

如果您需要3个条件,你需要加入表本身更多的时间(所以共3个次)

+0

嗨感谢您的回答,您可以给同样的查询3或4表。我是一名初学者,无法写入加入第三个表的查询。最大我有4或5表加入这样。 – 2012-02-21 11:39:43

+0

+1正如我在答复中所评论的,这是比我发布的更有效的解决方案。 – GarethD 2012-02-21 14:02:52

使用HAVING而不是自加入。因为不需要连接并且只需要1次表扫描,所以效率更高。这也意味着如果有多个条件,它只需要在HAVING子句中添加一个表达式,而不是额外的连接。

例如你的第二个例子:

SELECT ListingID 
FROM [YourTable] 
GROUP BY ListingID 
HAVING COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 1 AND Value = 1 THEN 1 END) > 0 
AND  COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 2 AND Value = 7 THEN 1 END) > 0 

附录

以上是完全错误的。我认为这在眼睛上稍微容易一些,但下面的效率更高。

SELECT t1.ListingID 
FROM Listing AS t1 
     INNER JOIN Listing AS t2 
      ON t2.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
     INNER JOIN Listing AS t3 
      ON t3.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
     INNER JOIN Listing AS t4 
      ON t4.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
WHERE (t1.ExtraFieldID = 1 AND t1.Value = 1) 
AND  (t2.ExtraFieldID = 2 AND t2.Value = 7) 
AND  (t3.ExtraFieldID = 3 AND t3.Value = '') 
AND  (t4.ExtraFieldID = 4 AND t4.Value = 1999) 

为了证明这一点,我跑到下面的代码进行测试:

DECLARE @Iterations INT, @Listings INT 
/******************************************************************************************************* 
SET THE PARAMETERS FOR THE TEST HERE, @Listings IS THE NUMBER OF ListingIDs TO INSERT INTO THE SAMPLE 
TABLE. EACH LISTING GETS 4 RECORDS SO 10,000 LISTINGS WILL GENERATE A SAMPLE OF 40,000 RECORDS ETC. 
@Iterations IS THE NUMBER OF SELECTS TO PERFORM TO TEST THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH METHOD. 
*******************************************************************************************************/ 
SET @Iterations = 500 
SET @Listings = 1000000 
/*******************************************************************************************************/ 
/*******************************************************************************************************/ 

IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM TempDB.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE Table_Name LIKE '#Listing%') 
    BEGIN 
     DROP TABLE #Listing 
    END 

CREATE TABLE #Listing (ListingID INT NOT NULL, ExtraFieldID TINYINT NOT NULL, Value VARCHAR(4), PRIMARY KEY (ListingID, ExtraFieldID)) 

IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM TempDB.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE Table_Name LIKE '#Results%') 
    BEGIN 
     DROP TABLE #Results 
    END 

CREATE TABLE #Results (GroupBy INT, SelfJoin INT) 

DECLARE @i INT, @Time DATETIME, @Time2 DATETIME, @t INT 
SET @i = ISNULL((SELECT MAX(ListingID) + 1 FROM #Listing), 0) 
-- FILL LISTING TABLE WITH RANDOM VALUES 
WHILE @i < @Listings 
    BEGIN 
     INSERT #Listing VALUES (@i, 1, ROUND(RAND() * 4, 0)) 
     INSERT #Listing VALUES (@i, 2, ROUND(RAND() * 20, 0)) 
     INSERT #Listing VALUES (@i, 3, CASE WHEN ROUND(RAND(), 0) = 0 THEN '' ELSE CONVERT(VARCHAR(4), ROUND(RAND(), 3) * 1000) END) 
     INSERT #Listing VALUES (@i, 4, DATEPART(YEAR, DATEADD(YEAR, (RAND()-1) * 100, GETDATE()))) 

     SET @i = @i + 1 
    END 

CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX #IX_Listing_Value ON #Listing (Value) WITH FILLFACTOR = 100 

SET @i = 0 
-- PERFORM BOTH METHODS X NUMBER OF TIMES TO GET AN AVERAGE EXECUTION TIME 
WHILE @i < @Iterations 
    BEGIN 
     SET @Time = GETDATE() 

     SELECT @t = COUNT(*) 
     FROM ( SELECT ListingID 
        FROM #Listing 
        GROUP BY ListingID 
        HAVING COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 1 AND Value = 1 THEN 1 END) > 0 
        AND  COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 2 AND Value = 7 THEN 1 END) > 0 
        AND  COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 3 AND Value = '' THEN 1 END) > 0 
        AND  COUNT(CASE WHEN ExtrafieldId = 4 AND Value = 1999 THEN 1 END) > 0 
       ) D 

     SET @Time2 = GETDATE() 

     SELECT @t = COUNT(*) 
     FROM ( SELECT t1.ListingID 
        FROM #Listing AS t1 
          JOIN #Listing AS t2 
           ON t2.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
          JOIN #Listing AS t3 
           ON t3.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
          JOIN #Listing AS t4 
           ON t4.ListingID = t1.ListingID 
        WHERE (t1.ExtraFieldID = 1 AND t1.Value = 1) 
        AND  (t2.ExtraFieldID = 2 AND t2.Value = 7) 
        AND  (t3.ExtraFieldID = 3 AND t3.Value = '') 
        AND  (t4.ExtraFieldID = 4 AND t4.Value = 1999) 
       ) D 

     INSERT INTO #Results 
     SELECT DATEDIFF(MICROSECOND, @Time, @Time2) [GroupBy], 
       DATEDIFF(MICROSECOND, @Time2, GETDATE()) [SelfJoin] 

     SET @i = @i + 1 
    END 

IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM TempDB.INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE Table_Name LIKE '#OverallResults%') 
    BEGIN 
     CREATE TABLE #OverallResults (GroupBy INT NOT NULL, SelfJoin INT NOT NULL, Iterations INT NOT NULL, Listings INT NOT NULL) 
    END 
INSERT INTO #OverallResults 
SELECT AVG(GroupBy) [Group By], 
     AVG(SelfJoin) [Self Join], 
     COUNT(*) [Iterations], 
     @Listings 
FROM #Results 

SELECT AVG(GroupBy) [Group By], 
     AVG(SelfJoin) [Self Join], 
     COUNT(*) [Iterations], 
     CONVERT(DECIMAL(5, 4), (AVG(GroupBy) - AVG(SelfJoin))/1000000.0) [Difference (Seconds)], 
     CONVERT(DECIMAL(4, 2), 100 * (1 - (1.0 * AVG(SelfJoin)/AVG(GroupBy)))) [Percent Faster] 
FROM #Results 

DROP TABLE #Listing 
DROP TABLE #results 

SELECT Records,  
     Iterations, 
     GroupBy [Group By], 
     SelfJoin [Self Join], 
     CONVERT(DECIMAL(5, 4), (GroupBy - SelfJoin)/1000000.0) [Difference (Seconds)], 
     CONVERT(DECIMAL(4, 2), 100 * (1 - (1.0 * SelfJoin/GroupBy))) [Percent Faster] 
FROM ( SELECT Listings * 4 [Records], 
        SUM(Iterations) [Iterations], 
        SUM(GroupBy * Iterations)/SUM(Iterations) [GroupBy], 
        SUM(SelfJoin * Iterations)/SUM(Iterations) [SelfJoin] 
      FROM #OverallResults 
      GROUP BY Listings 
     ) a 

这可以通过不同的变量来反复执行。我为100,1000,10000,100000和1000000列表运行了这个列表,每列有500条select语句以获得平均执行时间,这表明自上次加入的速度平均快了约60%,直到1,000,000个列表中的速度加快了95%。自我加入方式显然是表现的赢家。

+0

Gareth,如何在不使用'IN'子句或其他一些最佳方式的情况下将MasterItem列表[Listing]的listingId连接到上面的ListingId? – 2012-02-21 12:29:24

+0

您可以使用'SELECT * FROM ListingMasterTable INNER JOIN([MyAnswer])b ON a.ListingID = b.ListingID'。以下内容仍然有效:'SELECT * FROM ListingMasterTable WHERE列表ID IN([MyAnswer])'它可能不是最有效的方法。围绕IN和JOIN的优点讨论很多文章。 http://*.com/questions/2577174/join-vs-subquery – GarethD 2012-02-21 12:47:39

+0

这个查询将需要一个完整的表扫描或一些完整的索引扫描,以及一个“GROUP BY”计数。您可能会说它效率更高,但在大多数情况下,带有许多JOIN且没有GROUP BY的查询将比这更有效。因为它需要一些索引搜索(但不包括整个索引,只有相关的部分,与整个索引相比可能很小)。 – 2012-02-21 12:59:59

你可以使用union和distinct很容易。如果您使用的是IN子句使用ListingId作为另一个查询的输入您不必否则介意重复,您可以添加

SELECT DISTINCT ListingId FROM (
    SELECT 
    ListingId 
    ... -- the rest from below 
) AS Data 

这里的查询来获取上市(可能重复! ):

SELECT 
    ListingID 
FROM 
    TABLE_NAME 
WHERE 
    ExtrafieldId = 1 and Value = 1 
UNION ALL 
SELECT 
    ListingID 
FROM 
    TABLE_NAME 
WHERE 
    ExtrafieldId = 1 AND Value = 1 AND ExtrafieldId = 2 and Value = 7 
UNION ALL 
SELECT 
    ListingID 
FROM 
    TABLE_NAME 
WHERE 
    ExtrafieldId = 4 AND Value = 1999 
+1

中间的SELECT是毫无意义的。 'WHERE ExtrafieldId = 1 AND Value = 1 AND ExtrafieldId = 2和Value = 7'永远不会返回任何结果 - 因为如果Extrafield = 1那么它不能等于2,所以条件永远不会满足。您还正在使用'UNION'来分隔独立的WHERE子句。 “OR”和圆括号同样适用于更好的性能。 – GarethD 2012-02-21 12:03:55