I would like to select a random line in my database. I saw this solution on a website:
SELECT column FROM table
ORDER BY RAND()
LIMIT 1
This SQL query run but someone said me that it was a non performant query. Is there another solution ?
Thx
It is. You have to count rows number with
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM `table`;
After this with php function mt_rand() get the random from 1 to $count and get it with query:
SELECT `column` FROM `table` LIMIT $rand, 1
There's a lot more discussion of this subject, including performance implications and strategies for different DBMSs, in this question.
Related
I would like to construct a query that displays all the results in a table, but is offset by 5 from the start of the table. As far as I can tell, MySQL's LIMIT requires a limit as well as an offset. Is there any way to do this?
From the MySQL Manual on LIMIT:
To retrieve all rows from a certain
offset up to the end of the result
set, you can use some large number for
the second parameter. This statement
retrieves all rows from the 96th row
to the last:
SELECT * FROM tbl LIMIT 95, 18446744073709551615;
As you mentioned it LIMIT is required, so you need to use the biggest limit possible, which is 18446744073709551615 (maximum of unsigned BIGINT)
SELECT * FROM somewhere LIMIT 18446744073709551610 OFFSET 5
As noted in other answers, MySQL suggests using 18446744073709551615 as the number of records in the limit, but consider this: What would you do if you got 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 records back? In fact, what would you do if you got 1,000,000,000 records?
Maybe you do want more than one billion records, but my point is that there is some limit on the number you want, and it is less than 18 quintillion. For the sake of stability, optimization, and possibly usability, I would suggest putting some meaningful limit on the query. This would also reduce confusion for anyone who has never seen that magical looking number, and have the added benefit of communicating at least how many records you are willing to handle at once.
If you really must get all 18 quintillion records from your database, maybe what you really want is to grab them in increments of 100 million and loop 184 billion times.
Another approach would be to select an autoimcremented column and then filter it using HAVING.
SET #a := 0;
select #a:=#a + 1 AS counter, table.* FROM table
HAVING counter > 4
But I would probably stick with the high limit approach.
As others mentioned, from the MySQL manual. In order to achieve that, you can use the maximum value of an unsigned big int, that is this awful number (18446744073709551615). But to make it a little bit less messy you can the tilde "~" bitwise operator.
LIMIT 95, ~0
it works as a bitwise negation. The result of "~0" is 18446744073709551615.
You can use a MySQL statement with LIMIT:
START TRANSACTION;
SET #my_offset = 5;
SET #rows = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM my_table);
PREPARE statement FROM 'SELECT * FROM my_table LIMIT ? OFFSET ?';
EXECUTE statement USING #rows, #my_offset;
COMMIT;
Tested in MySQL 5.5.44. Thus, we can avoid the insertion of the number 18446744073709551615.
note: the transaction makes sure that the variable #rows is in agreement to the table considered in the execution of statement.
I ran into a very similar issue when practicing LC#1321, in which I have to select all the dates but the first 6 dates are skipped.
I achieved this in MySQL with the help of ROW_NUMBER() window function and subquery. For example, the following query returns all the results with the first five rows skipped:
SELECT
fieldname1,
fieldname2
FROM(
SELECT
*,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER() row_num
FROM
mytable
) tmp
WHERE
row_num > 5;
You may need to add some more logics in the subquery, especially in OVER() to fit your need. In addition, RANK()/DENSE_RANK() window functions may be used instead of ROW_NUMBER() depending on your real offset logic.
Reference:
MySQL 8.0 Reference Manual - ROW_NUMBER()
Just today I was reading about the best way to get huge amounts of data (more than a million rows) from a mysql table. One way is, as suggested, using LIMIT x,y where x is the offset and y the last row you want returned. However, as I found out, it isn't the most efficient way to do so. If you have an autoincrement column, you can as easily use a SELECT statement with a WHERE clause saying from which record you'd like to start.
For example,
SELECT * FROM table_name WHERE id > x;
It seems that mysql gets all results when you use LIMIT and then only shows you the records that fit in the offset: not the best for performance.
Source: Answer to this question MySQL Forums. Just take note, the question is about 6 years old.
I know that this is old but I didnt see a similar response so this is the solution I would use.
First, I would execute a count query on the table to see how many records exist. This query is fast and normally the execution time is negligible. Something like:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table_name;
Then I would build my query using the result I got from count as my limit (since that is the maximum number of rows the table could possibly return). Something like:
SELECT * FROM table_name LIMIT count_result OFFSET desired_offset;
Or possibly something like:
SELECT * FROM table_name LIMIT desired_offset, count_result;
Of course, if necessary, you could subtract desired_offset from count_result to get an actual, accurate value to supply as the limit. Passing the "18446744073709551610" value just doesnt make sense if I can actually determine an appropriate limit to provide.
WHERE .... AND id > <YOUROFFSET>
id can be any autoincremented or unique numerical column you have...
I would like to know if it is possible to retrive one single random row from search results. I mean I have query like this:
SELECT mp.name,mp.icon,mp.id,mp.wspx,mp.wspy,ms.icon FROM maps_points as mp JOIN maps_section as ms ON(ms.id = mp.section)
I would like to get one random row from results generated from this query. Is that possible with one mysql query or should I just get all results and get this one random in PHP?
a simple way is to add ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1 to the query. Do take a look at some of the reasons why this can be a bad idea though, e.g.
Why don't use mysql ORDER BY RAND()?
MySQL: Alternatives to ORDER BY RAND()
How can i optimize MySQL's ORDER BY RAND() function?
SELECT mp.name,mp.icon,mp.id,mp.wspx,mp.wspy,ms.icon
FROM maps_points as mp
JOIN maps_section as ms ON(ms.id = mp.section)
ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1
Ok, I knew this one, but is there better and faster way to do that ? I mean I've seen some other approaches but they were all about random row from table and I need to pick random row from some set of results :)
suppose I have a table t and table t has 15000 entries
suppose the query
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000
returns 1000 rows
but then I only want the first 10 rows so I do a LIMIT
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000 LIMIT 10
is it possible to construct a single query in which in addition to returning the 10 rows information with the LIMIT clause above, it also returns the total count of the rows that satisfy the conditions set in the WHERE clause, hence in addition to returning the 10 rows above, it also returns 1000 since there are a total of 1000 rows satisfying the WHERE clause...and have both returned in a single query
Preferred solution
First of all, the found_rows() function is not portable (it is a MySQL extension) and is going to be removed. As user #Zveddochka pointed out, it has already been deprecated in MySQL 8.0.17.
But more importantly, it turns out that if you use proper indexing, then running two queries is actually faster. The SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS directive is achieved through a "virtual scan" that incurs an additional recovery cost. When the query is not indexed, then this cost would be the same of a COUNT(), and therefore running two queries will cost double - i.e., using SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS will make things run 50% faster.
But what happens when the query is properly indexed? The guys at Percona checked it out. And it turns out that not only the COUNT() is blazing fast since it only accesses metadata and indexes, and the query without SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS is faster because it doesn't incur any additional cost; the cost of the two queries combined is less than the cost of the enhanced single query:
Results with SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS are following: for each b value it
takes 20-100 sec to execute uncached and 2-5 sec after warmup. Such
difference could be explained by the I/O which required for this query
– mysql accesses all 10k rows this query could produce without LIMIT
clause.
The results are following: it takes 0.01-0.11 sec to run this query
first time and 0.00-0.02 sec for all consecutive runs.
So, as we can see, total time for SELECT+COUNT (0.00-0.15 sec) is much
less than execution time for original query (2-100 sec). Let’s take a
look at EXPLAINs...
So, what to do?
// Run two queries ensuring they satisfy exactly the same conditions
$field1 = "Field1, Field2, blah blah blah";
$field2 = "COUNT(*) AS rows";
$where = "Field5 = 'X' AND Field6 = 'Y' AND blah blah";
$cntQuery = "SELECT {$field2} FROM {$joins} WHERE {$where}";
$rowQuery = "SELECT {$field1} FROM {$joins} WHERE {$where} LIMIT {$limit}";
Now the first query returns the count, the second query returns the actual data.
Old answer (useful just for non-indexed tables)
Don't do this. If you find out this section of the answer works for you better than the section above, it's almost certainly a signal that something else is not optimal in your setup - most likely you're not using the indexes properly, or you need to update your MySQL server, or run an analyze/optimize of the database to update cardinality statistics.
You can, but I think it would be a performance killer.
Your best option would be to use the SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS MySQL extension and issue a second query to recover the full number of rows using FOUND_ROWS().
SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS * FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000 LIMIT 10;
SELECT FOUND_ROWS();
See e.g http://www.arraystudio.com/as-workshop/mysql-get-total-number-of-rows-when-using-limit.html
Or you could simply run the full query without LIMIT clause, and retrieve only the first ten rows. Then you can use one query as you wanted, and also get the row count through mysql_num_rows(). This is not ideal, but also not so catastrophic for most queries.
If you do this last, though, be very careful to close the query and free its resources: I have found out that retrieving less than the full resultset and forgetting to free the rs handle is one outstanding cause of "metadata locking".
You can try SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS, which can get a count of total records without running the statement again.
SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS * FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000 LIMIT 10; -- get records
SELECT FOUND_ROWS(); -- get count
Reference: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/information-functions.html
"is it possible to construct a single query in which in addition to returning the 10 rows information with the LIMIT clause above, it also returns the total count of the rows that satisfy the conditions set in the WHERE clause"
Yes, it is possible to do both in single query, by using windowed function i.e. COUNT(*) OVER()(MySQL 8.0+):
SELECT t.*, COUNT(*) OVER() AS cnt
FROM t
WHERE t.nid <1000
LIMIT 10;
db<>fiddle demo
Sidenote:
LIMIT without explicit ORDER BY is non-deterministic. It could return different results between multiple runs.
There are many things that need discussing.
A LIMIT without an ORDER BY is somewhat unpredictable, hence somewhat meaningless.
But if you add an ORDER BY, it may need to find all the rows, sort them then deliver only the 10 you want.
Or, the ORDER BY may be handled adequately by an INDEX.
Your particular query, if turned into 2 queries (as needed after 8.0.17), would be
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000 LIMIT 10;
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000;
Note that each of those would benefit from INDEX(nid). The first would pick 10 items from the index's BTree, then look them up in the data's BTree -- only 10 rows touched in each. The second would scan the INDEX until it hits 1000, and not touch the data BTree.
If you add an ORDER BY as advised, then, the first query:
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000 ORDER BY t.nid LIMIT 10;
will work identically as above. But
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000 ORDER BY t.abcd LIMIT 10;
will need to scan lots of rows, and be quite slow. And probably use a temp table and filesort. (Check EXPLAIN for details.) INDEX(nid, abcd) would help, but only a little.
And there are other variants, such as when the index can be "covering".
What is the goal of having "one query"?
Speed? -- as discussed above, there are other factors that are more pertinent.
Consistency? -- You may need a transaction to avoid, for example, getting N rows from the first query and a smaller number from the COUNT.
BEGIN;
SELECT * ...
SELECT COUNT(*) ...
COMMIT;
Single command? -- Consider a stored procedure that combines the 2 statements. Or
SELECT * FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000 LIMIT 10
UNION ALL
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM t WHERE t.nid < 1000;
but that gets tricky because the number of columns is different, so some kludge would be needed to make the second query have the same number of columns. Another variant involves GROUP BY WITH ROLLUP. (But it may be even harder to fabricate.)
Lukasz's Answer looks promising. However, it gives an extra column (which might be good) and its performance needs to be tested. If you are on 8.0 and their answer works well for you, accept that Answer.
Count(*) time complexity is O(1), so you can use a subquery
SELECT *, (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000) AS cnt
FROM t
WHERE t.nid <1000
LIMIT 10
Sounds like you want FOUND_ROWS()
SELECT SQL_CALC_FOUND_ROWS * FROM t WHERE t.nid <1000 LIMIT 10;
SELECT FOUND_ROWS();
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
MySQL select 10 random rows from 600K rows fast
I need to pull from a table a random id. At this moment only a few records exists but with time they will grow. What methods of getting this id are in Php or MySql, and what are the trade offs, consequences between them. One last thing i need speed and performance.
select * from YOUR_TABLE order by rand() limit 1
You can achieve this direct in your SQL:
SELECT `idfield` FROM `table` ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 0,1;
Also see here for some alternatives.
This will be a simple means of execution than building the randomisation in your PHP and then passing to mySQL, though the link above details the merits of the various approaches.
SELECT id FROM table ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1
What this does is basically: take the table, order the records by a random number, and get the first record's ID.
There is already a lot of questions and answer about that:
Random Records Mysql PHP
mysql query with random and desc
If you have less that 500,000 records, the RAND() is perfectly fine.
SELECT * FROM tbl_name ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1
Well you can obtain a random number with RAND(), but you would still have to call that method/function until you actually get something (you can have 1,2,5,6,100 as id`s due to deletion).
there is a post on this http://jan.kneschke.de/projects/mysql/order-by-rand/
Procedures can be usefull (but said to be slow...):
1 var to get the maximum value
then produce a random within 1 and that interval (or get the minimum)
then query
I'm currently displaying a random row from all the entries and that works fine.
SELECT * FROM $db_table where live = 1 order by rand() limit 1
now, i'd like to limit it to the last 100 entries in the db.
every row in the db has an ID and a timestamp.
it's a small database, so overhead-minimization is not a priority.
thanks!
EDIT:
Still can't get it running.. I get a mysql_fetch_array error:
"Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource
Here's all of my code:
<?php $sql = "SELECT * FROM
(SELECT * FROM $db_table ORDER BY $datetime DESC LIMIT 100)
ORDER BY rand() LIMIT 1";
$query = mysql_query($sql);
while($row = mysql_fetch_array($query)) {
echo "".$row['familyname']."";
} ?>
Thanks again!
This is what I came up with off the top of my head. I've tested it and it works in SQLite, so you shouldn't have much trouble with MySQL. The only change was that SQLite's random function is random() not rand():
SELECT * FROM
(SELECT * FROM $db_table ORDER BY $timestamp DESC LIMIT 100)
ORDER BY rand() LIMIT 1
This page has a pretty detailed writeup on how to optimize an ORDER BY RAND()-type query. It's actually too involved for me to explain adequately on SO (also, I don't fully understand some of the SQL commands used, though the general concept makes sense), but the final optimized query makes use of several optimizations:
First, ORDER BY RAND(), which uses a filesort algorithm on the entire table, is dropped. Instead, a query is constructed to simply generate a single random id.
At this stage, an index scan is being used, which is even less efficient than a filesort in many cases, so this is optimized away with a subquery.
The WHERE clause is replaced with a JOIN to reduce the number of rows fetched by the outer SELECT, and the number of times the subquery is executed, to just 1.
In order to account for holes in the ids (from deletions) and to ensure an equal distribution, a mapping table is created to map row numbers to ids.
Triggers are used to automatically update & maintain the mapping table.
Lastly, stored procedures are created to allow multiple rows to be selected at once. (Here, ORDER BY is reintroduced, but used only on the result rows.)
Here are the performance figures:
Q1. ORDER BY RAND()
Q2. RAND() * MAX(ID)
Q3. RAND() * MAX(ID) + ORDER BY ID
100 1.000 10.000 100.000 1.000.000
Q1 0:00.718s 0:02.092s 0:18.684s 2:59.081s 58:20.000s
Q2 0:00.519s 0:00.607s 0:00.614s 0:00.628s 0:00.637s
Q3 0:00.570s 0:00.607s 0:00.614s 0:00.628s 0:00.637s