forked from Mirrors/freeswitch
266 lines
9.4 KiB
Tcl
266 lines
9.4 KiB
Tcl
|
#
|
||
|
# Run this TCL script to generate HTML for the goals.html file.
|
||
|
#
|
||
|
set rcsid {$Id: optimizer.tcl,v 1.1 2005/08/30 22:44:06 drh Exp $}
|
||
|
source common.tcl
|
||
|
header {The SQLite Query Optimizer}
|
||
|
|
||
|
proc CODE {text} {
|
||
|
puts "<blockquote><pre>"
|
||
|
puts $text
|
||
|
puts "</pre></blockquote>"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
proc IMAGE {name {caption {}}} {
|
||
|
puts "<center><img src=\"$name\">"
|
||
|
if {$caption!=""} {
|
||
|
puts "<br>$caption"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
puts "</center>"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
proc PARAGRAPH {text} {
|
||
|
puts "<p>$text</p>\n"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
proc HEADING {level name} {
|
||
|
puts "<h$level>$name</h$level>"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
HEADING 1 {The SQLite Query Optimizer}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
This article describes how the SQLite query optimizer works.
|
||
|
This is not something you have to know in order to use SQLite - many
|
||
|
programmers use SQLite successfully without the slightest hint of what
|
||
|
goes on in the inside.
|
||
|
But a basic understanding of what SQLite is doing
|
||
|
behind the scenes will help you to write more efficient SQL. And the
|
||
|
knowledge gained by studying the SQLite query optimizer has broad
|
||
|
application since most other relational database engines operate
|
||
|
similarly.
|
||
|
A solid understanding of how the query optimizer works is also
|
||
|
required before making meaningful changes or additions to the SQLite, so
|
||
|
this article should be read closely by anyone aspiring
|
||
|
to hack the source code.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
HEADING 2 Background
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
It is important to understand that SQL is a programming language.
|
||
|
SQL is a perculiar programming language in that it
|
||
|
describes <u>what</u> the programmer wants to compute not <u>how</u>
|
||
|
to compute it as most other programming languages do.
|
||
|
But perculiar or not, SQL is still just a programming language.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
It is very helpful to think of each SQL statement as a separate
|
||
|
program.
|
||
|
An important job of the SQL database engine is to translate each
|
||
|
SQL statement from its descriptive form that specifies what the
|
||
|
information is desired (the <u>what</u>)
|
||
|
into a procedural form that specifies how to go
|
||
|
about acquiring the desired information (the <u>how</u>).
|
||
|
The task of translating the <u>what</u> into a
|
||
|
<u>how</u> is assigned to the query optimizer.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
The beauty of SQL comes from the fact that the optimizer frees the programmer
|
||
|
from having to worry over the details of <u>how</u>. The programmer
|
||
|
only has to specify the <u>what</u> and then leave the optimizer
|
||
|
to deal with all of the minutae of implementing the
|
||
|
<u>how</u>. Thus the programmer is able to think and work at a
|
||
|
much higher level and leave the optimizer to stress over the low-level
|
||
|
work.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
HEADING 2 {Database Layout}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
An SQLite database consists of one or more "b-trees".
|
||
|
Each b-tree contains zero or more "rows".
|
||
|
A single row contains a "key" and some "data".
|
||
|
In general, both the key and the data are arbitrary binary
|
||
|
data of any length.
|
||
|
The keys must all be unique within a single b-tree.
|
||
|
Rows are stored in order of increasing key values - each
|
||
|
b-tree has a comparision functions for keys that determines
|
||
|
this order.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
In SQLite, each SQL table is stored as a b-tree where the
|
||
|
key is a 64-bit integer and the data is the content of the
|
||
|
table row. The 64-bit integer key is the ROWID. And, of course,
|
||
|
if the table has an INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, then that integer is just
|
||
|
an alias for the ROWID.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
Consider the following block of SQL code:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
CODE {
|
||
|
CREATE TABLE ex1(
|
||
|
id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
|
||
|
x VARCHAR(30),
|
||
|
y INTEGER
|
||
|
);
|
||
|
INSERT INTO ex1 VALUES(NULL,'abc',12345);
|
||
|
INSERT INTO ex1 VALUES(NULL,456,'def');
|
||
|
INSERT INTO ex1 VALUES(100,'hello','world');
|
||
|
INSERT INTO ex1 VALUES(-5,'abc','xyz');
|
||
|
INSERT INTO ex1 VALUES(54321,NULL,987);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
This code generates a new b-tree (named "ex1") containing 5 rows.
|
||
|
This table can be visualized as follows:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
IMAGE table-ex1b2.gif
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
Note that the key for each row if the b-tree is the INTEGER PRIMARY KEY
|
||
|
for that row. (Remember that the INTEGER PRIMARY KEY is just an alias
|
||
|
for the ROWID.) The other fields of the table form the data for each
|
||
|
entry in the b-tree. Note also that the b-tree entries are in ROWID order
|
||
|
which is different from the order that they were originally inserted.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
Now consider the following SQL query:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
CODE {
|
||
|
SELECT y FROM ex1 WHERE x=456;
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
When the SQLite parser and query optimizer are handed this query, they
|
||
|
have to translate it into a procedure that will find the desired result.
|
||
|
In this case, they do what is call a "full table scan". They start
|
||
|
at the beginning of the b-tree that contains the table and visit each
|
||
|
row. Within each row, the value of the "x" column is tested and when it
|
||
|
is found to match 456, the value of the "y" column is output.
|
||
|
We can represent this procedure graphically as follows:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
IMAGE fullscanb.gif
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
A full table scan is the access method of last resort. It will always
|
||
|
work. But if the table contains millions of rows and you are only looking
|
||
|
a single one, it might take a very long time to find the particular row
|
||
|
you are interested in.
|
||
|
In particular, the time needed to access a single row of the table is
|
||
|
proportional to the total number of rows in the table.
|
||
|
So a big part of the job of the optimizer is to try to find ways to
|
||
|
satisfy the query without doing a full table scan.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
The usual way to avoid doing a full table scan is use a binary search
|
||
|
to find the particular row or rows of interest in the table.
|
||
|
Consider the next query which searches on rowid instead of x:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
CODE {
|
||
|
SELECT y FROM ex1 WHERE rowid=2;
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
In the previous query, we could not use a binary search for x because
|
||
|
the values of x were not ordered. But the rowid values are ordered.
|
||
|
So instead of having to visit every row of the b-tree looking for one
|
||
|
that has a rowid value of 2, we can do a binary search for that particular
|
||
|
row and output its corresponding y value. We show this graphically
|
||
|
as follows:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
IMAGE direct1b.gif
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
When doing a binary search, we only have to look at a number of
|
||
|
rows with is proportional to the logorithm of the number of entries
|
||
|
in the table. For a table with just 5 entires as in the example above,
|
||
|
the difference between a full table scan and a binary search is
|
||
|
negligible. In fact, the full table scan might be faster. But in
|
||
|
a database that has 5 million rows, a binary search will be able to
|
||
|
find the desired row in only about 23 tries, whereas the full table
|
||
|
scan will need to look at all 5 million rows. So the binary search
|
||
|
is about 200,000 times faster in that case.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
A 200,000-fold speed improvement is huge. So we always want to do
|
||
|
a binary search rather than a full table scan when we can.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
The problem with a binary search is that the it only works if the
|
||
|
fields you are search for are in sorted order. So we can do a binary
|
||
|
search when looking up the rowid because the rows of the table are
|
||
|
sorted by rowid. But we cannot use a binary search when looking up
|
||
|
x because the values in the x column are in no particular order.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
The way to work around this problem and to permit binary searching on
|
||
|
fields like x is to provide an index.
|
||
|
An index is another b-tree.
|
||
|
But in the index b-tree the key is not the rowid but rather the field
|
||
|
or fields being indexed followed by the rowid.
|
||
|
The data in an index b-tree is empty - it is not needed or used.
|
||
|
The following diagram shows an index on the x field of our example table:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
IMAGE index-ex1-x-b.gif
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
An important point to note in the index are that they keys of the
|
||
|
b-tree are in sorted order. (Recall that NULL values in SQLite sort
|
||
|
first, followed by numeric values in numerical order, then strings, and
|
||
|
finally BLOBs.) This is the property that will allow use to do a
|
||
|
binary search for the field x. The rowid is also included in every
|
||
|
key for two reasons. First, by including the rowid we guarantee that
|
||
|
every key will be unique. And second, the rowid will be used to look
|
||
|
up the actual table entry after doing the binary search. Finally, note
|
||
|
that the data portion of the index b-tree serves no purpose and is thus
|
||
|
kept empty to save space in the disk file.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
Remember what the original query example looked like:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
CODE {
|
||
|
SELECT y FROM ex1 WHERE x=456;
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
The first time this query was encountered we had to do a full table
|
||
|
scan. But now that we have an index on x, we can do a binary search
|
||
|
on that index for the entry where x==456. Then from that entry we
|
||
|
can find the rowid value and use the rowid to look up the corresponding
|
||
|
entry in the original table. From the entry in the original table,
|
||
|
we can find the value y and return it as our result. The following
|
||
|
diagram shows this process graphically:
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
IMAGE indirect1b1.gif
|
||
|
|
||
|
PARAGRAPH {
|
||
|
With the index, we are able to look up an entry based on the value of
|
||
|
x after visiting only a logorithmic number of b-tree entries. Unlike
|
||
|
the case where we were searching using rowid, we have to do two binary
|
||
|
searches for each output row. But for a 5-million row table, that is
|
||
|
still only 46 searches instead of 5 million for a 100,000-fold speedup.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
HEADING 3 {Parsing The WHERE Clause}
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
# parsing the where clause
|
||
|
# rowid lookup
|
||
|
# index lookup
|
||
|
# index lookup without the table
|
||
|
# how an index is chosen
|
||
|
# joins
|
||
|
# join reordering
|
||
|
# order by using an index
|
||
|
# group by using an index
|
||
|
# OR -> IN optimization
|
||
|
# Bitmap indices
|
||
|
# LIKE and GLOB optimization
|
||
|
# subquery flattening
|
||
|
# MIN and MAX optimizations
|