On Nov 12, 2007 9:22 AM, Afan Pasalic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you have to deal with it again consider using a bunch of unions
> instead of the 'IN'. Not prettiest thing, but it should fix your
> performance issue.
> Could you please give me more details about your statement that mysql dea
On Nov 12, 2007 7:57 AM, Stut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
>
> Rob Wultsch wrote:
> > On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
> >> is extremely slow a
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your reply.
Rob Wultsch wrote:
On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
is extremely slow and I've been battling for a couple of days on an off
to try and get a combination of in
On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
> is extremely slow and I've been battling for a couple of days on an off
> to try and get a combination of indexes to optimise it. Any help would
> be grea
I think the second can be better (more different values). But it
contains almost the same data than the table.
Try :
explain Select machine,count(*) from syslog WHERE date1 > (NOW()
- INTERVAL 24
hour) AND message LIKE 'sshd%' GROUP BY machine;
But an index with(date1, message, machine)
