Sql Server Performance Tips and Guidelines
• If you want to boost the performance of a query that includes an AND operator in the WHERE clause, consider the following:
• Of the search criteria in the WHERE clause, at least one of them should be based on a highly selective column that has an index.
• If at least one of the search criteria in the WHERE clause is not highly selective, consider adding indexes to all of the columns referenced in the WHERE clause.
• If none of the columns in the WHERE clause are selective enough to use an index on their own, consider creating a covering index for this query.
• The Query Optimizer will always perform a table scan or a clustered index scan on a table if the WHERE clause in the query contains an OR operator and if any of the referenced columns in the OR clause are not indexed (or do not have a useful index). Because of this, if you use many queries with OR clauses, you will want to ensure that each referenced column in the WHERE clause has an index.
• If you have a query that uses ORs and it is not making the best use of indexes, consider rewriting it as a UNION and then testing performance. Only through testing can you be sure that one version of your query will be faster than another.
• If you use the SOUNDEX function against a table column in a WHERE clause, the Query Optimizer will ignore any available indexes and perform a table scan.
• Queries that include either the DISTINCT or the GROUP BY clauses can be optimized by including appropriate indexes. Any of the following indexing strategies can be used:
• Include a covering, non-clustered index (covering the appropriate columns) of the DISTINCT or the GROUP BY clauses.
• Include a clustered index on the columns in the GROUP BY clause.
• Include a clustered index on the columns found in the SELECT clause.
• Adding appropriate indexes to queries that include DISTINCT or GROUP BY is most important for those queries that run often.
• If you use BULK INSERT to import data into SQL Server, then use the TABLOCK hint along with it. This will prevent SQL Server from running out of locks during very large imports and will also boost performance due to the reduction of lock contention.
• Always specify the narrowest columns you can. The narrower the column, the less amount of data SQL Server has to store and the faster SQL Server is able to read and write data. In addition, if any sorts need to be performed on the column, the narrower the column, the faster the sort will be.
• Carefully evaluate whether your SELECT query needs the DISTINCT clause or not. Some developers automatically add this clause to every one of their SELECT statements, even when it is not necessary. This is a bad habit that should be stopped.
• When you need to use SELECT INTO option, keep in mind that it can lock system tables, preventing other users from accessing the data they need while the data is being inserted. In order to prevent or minimize the problems caused by locked tables, try to schedule the use of SELECT INTO when your SQL Server is less busy. In addition, try to keep the amount of data inserted to a minimum. In some cases, it may be better to perform several smaller SELECT INTOs instead of performing one large SELECT INTO.
• If you need to verify the existence of a record in a table, don't use SELECT COUNT (*) in your Transact-SQL code to identify it. This is very inefficient and wastes server resources. Instead, use the Transact-SQL IF EXISTS to determine if the record in question exists, which is much more efficient.
• By default, some developers -- especially those who have not worked with SQL Server before -- routinely include code similar to this in their WHERE clauses when they make string comparisons:
SELECT column_name FROM table_name
WHERE LOWER (column_name) = 'name'
In other words, these developers are making the assumption that the data in SQL Server is case-sensitive, which it generally is not. If your SQL Server database is not configured to be case sensitive, you don't need to use LOWER or UPPER to force the case of text to be equal for a comparison to be performed. Just leave these functions out of your code. This will speed up the performance of your query, as any use of text functions in a WHERE clause hurts performance.
However, what if your database has been configured to be case-sensitive? Should you then use the LOWER and UPPER functions to ensure that comparisons are properly compared? No. The above example is still poor coding. If you have to deal with ensuring case is consistent for proper comparisons, use the technique described below, along with appropriate indexes on the column in question:
SELECT column_name FROM table_name
WHERE column_name = 'NAME' or column_name = 'name'
This code will run much faster than the first example.
• If you currently have a query that uses NOT IN, which offers poor performance because the SQL Server optimizer has to use a nested table scan to perform this activity, instead try to use one of the following options, all of which offer better performance:
• Use EXISTS or NOT EXISTS
• Use IN
• Perform a LEFT OUTER JOIN and check for a NULL condition
• When you have a choice of using the IN or the EXISTS clause in your Transact-SQL, you will generally want to use the EXISTS clause, as it is usually more efficient and performs faster.
• If you find that SQL Server uses a TABLE SCAN instead of an INDEX SEEK when you use an IN/OR clause as part of your WHERE clause, even when those columns are covered by an index, consider using an index hint to force the Query Optimizer to use the index.
• If you use LIKE in your WHERE clause, try to use one or more leading characters in the clause, if possible. For example, use:
LIKE 'm%' instead of LIKE ‘%m’
• If your application needs to retrieve summary data often, but you don't want to have the overhead of calculating it on the fly every time it is needed, consider using a trigger that updates summary values after each transaction into a summary table.
• When you have a choice of using the IN or the BETWEEN clauses in your Transact-SQL, you will generally want to use the BETWEEN clause, as it is much more efficient. For example...
SELECT task_id, task_name
FROM tasks
WHERE task_id in (1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004)
...is much less efficient than this:
SELECT task_id, task_name
FROM tasks
WHERE task_id BETWEEN 1000 and 1004
• If possible, try to avoid using the SUBSTRING function in your WHERE clauses. Depending on how it is constructed, using the SUBSTRING function can force a table scan instead of allowing the optimizer to use an index (assuming there is one). If the substring you are searching for does not include the first character of the column you are searching for, then a table scan is performed.
• If possible, you should avoid using the SUBSTRING function and use the LIKE condition instead for better performance. Instead of doing this:
WHERE SUBSTRING(task_name,1,1) = 'b'
Try using this instead:
WHERE task_name LIKE 'b%'
• If you have a WHERE clause that includes expressions connected by two or more AND operators, SQL Server will evaluate them from left to right in the order they are written. This assumes that no parentheses have been used to change the order of execution. Because of this, you may want to consider one of the following when using AND:
• Locate the least likely true AND expression first.
• If both parts of an AND expression are equally likely of being false, put the least complex AND expression first.
• You may want to consider using Query Analyzer or Management Studio to look at the execution plans of your queries to see which is best for your situation
• Don't use ORDER BY in your SELECT statements unless you really need to, as it adds a lot of extra overhead. For example, perhaps it may be more efficient to sort the data at the client than at the server.
• Whenever SQL Server has to perform a sorting operation, additional resources have to be used to perform this task. Sorting often occurs when any of the following Transact-SQL statements are executed:
• ORDER BY
• GROUP BY
• SELECT DISTINCT
• UNION
• If you have to sort by a particular column often, consider making that column a clustered index. This is because the data is already presorted for you and SQL Server is smart enough not to resort the data.
• If your WHERE clause includes an IN operator along with a list of values to be tested in the query, order the list of values so that the most frequently found ones are placed at the start of the list and the less frequently found ones are placed at the end of the list. This can speed up performance because the IN option returns true as soon as any of the values in the list produce a match. The sooner the match is made, the faster the query completes.
• If your application performs many wildcard (LIKE %) text searches on CHAR or VARCHAR columns, consider using SQL Server's full-text search option. The Search Service can significantly speed up wildcard searches of text stored in a database.
• The GROUP BY clause can be used with or without an aggregate function. However, if you want optimum performance, don't use the GROUP BY clause without an aggregate function. This is because you can accomplish the same end result by using the DISTINCT option instead, and it is faster. For example, you could write your query two different ways:
SELECT task_id
FROM tasks
WHERE task_id BETWEEN 10 AND 20
GROUP BY OrderID
...or:
SELECT DISTINCT task_id
FROM tasks
WHERE task_id BETWEEN 10 AND 20
• It is important to design applications that keep transactions as short as possible. This reduces locking and increases application concurrently, which helps to boost performance.
• In order to reduce network traffic between the client or middle-tier and SQL Server -- and also to boost your SQL Server-based application's performance -- only the data needed by the client or middle-tier should be returned by SQL Server. In other words, don't return more data (both rows and columns) from SQL Server than you need to the client or middle-tier and then further reduce the data to the data you really need at the client or middle-tier. This wastes SQL Server resources and network bandwidth.
• To make complex queries easier to analyze, consider breaking them down into their smaller constituent parts. One way to do this is to simply create lists of the key components of the query, such as:
• List all of the columns that are to be returned
• List all of the columns that are used in the WHERE clause
• List all of the columns used in the JOINs (if applicable)
• List all the tables used in JOINs (if applicable)
• Once you have the above information organized into this easy-to-comprehend form, it is much easier to identify those columns that could potentially make use of indexes when executed.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Jitesh,
ReplyDeleteQuery to find 10th highest salary, there is a RowNumber, Could you please elaborate the RowNumber.
HI GAURAV,
ReplyDeleteSEE, IN THIS QUERY FIRST EXECUTE THE DERIVED QUERY. IT WILL RETURN YOU ALL THE RECORDS IN DESC ORDER AS PER SAL.
ROW_NUMBER() returns a sequential number, starting at 1, for each row returned in a resultset.
FOR EXAMPLE :
EMPID EMPNAME SAL RANK
108 RAHUL 15000 1
102 AJAY 13000 2
105 PIYUSH 12000 3
.
.
.
101 AKHIL 6000 10
111 MUBARIK 5000 11
NOTE : - RANK COLUMN IS A ROW_NUMBER() ALIAS. SO DON'T CONFUSE.
AND WITH THE HELP OF ROW_NUMBER() U CAN EASILY FIND ANY NTH NUMBER OF SALARY.
Thanks Jitesh,
ReplyDeleteIts really nice. One more query. It might be silly for you but please reply. In following SQL query what is 'OVER'. Is it syntax to use ROW_NUMBER()?
SELECT *, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (order by EMP.SAL DESC) AS RANK FROM EMP) v where RANK = 10;
Hi Gaurav,
ReplyDeleteYes, Over() is a syntax to use with row_number(). If u r using row_number Without over() it will give u an error.
"Incorrect syntax near 'row_number', expected 'OVER'."
and also U have to give 'order by' clause in Over().Otherwise it will give u n error.
'The ranking function "row_number" must have an ORDER BY clause.'
and please give a comment on particular
blog.