传入的大列表上的 sql server 2008 过滤器 [英] sql server 2008 filter on big list passed in
本文介绍了传入的大列表上的 sql server 2008 过滤器的处理方法，对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值，需要的朋友们下面随着小编来一起学习吧！
问题描述
我遇到了性能问题.我正在尝试根据很长的参数列表从表中进行选择
I am having a performance issue. I am trying to select from a table based on a very long list of parameters
目前正在使用这个存储过程
Currently am using this stored proc
CREATE PROC [dbo].[GetFileContentsFromTitles]
@MyTitles varchar(max)
AS
SELECT [Title], [Sequence] From [dbo].[MasterSequence]
WHERE charindex(',' + Title + ',', ',' + @MyTitles + ',') > 0;
@MyTitles 可以是一个非常大的数字(目前正在做一个由逗号分隔的 4000 个条目的字符串).有什么建议?谢谢
Where @MyTitles can be a very big number (currently doing a string with 4000 entries seperated by commas). Any suggestions? Thanks
推荐答案
好吧，如果你想要这样的性能，那么你需要使用最好的东西.首先，创建这个用于分割字符串的函数(我大约两周前从 Jeff Moden 那里得到的):
OK, if you want performance for something like this, then you need to use the best stuff out there. First, create this function for splitting strings (which I got from Jeff Moden about two weeks ago):
SET ANSI_NULLS ON
GO
SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON
GO
ALTER FUNCTION [dbo].[DelimitedSplit8K]
/**********************************************************************************************************************
Purpose:
Split a given string at a given delimiter and return a list of the split elements (items).
Notes:
1. Leading a trailing delimiters are treated as if an empty string element were present.
2. Consecutive delimiters are treated as if an empty string element were present between them.
3. Except when spaces are used as a delimiter, all spaces present in each element are preserved.
Returns:
iTVF containing the following:
ItemNumber = Element position of Item as a BIGINT (not converted to INT to eliminate a CAST)
Item = Element value as a VARCHAR(8000)
Statistics on this function may be found at the following URL:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1101315-203-4.aspx
CROSS APPLY Usage Examples and Tests:
--=====================================================================================================================
-- TEST 1:
-- This tests for various possible conditions in a string using a comma as the delimiter. The expected results are
-- laid out in the comments
--=====================================================================================================================
--===== Conditionally drop the test tables to make reruns easier for testing.
-- (this is NOT a part of the solution)
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#JBMTest') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE #JBMTest
;
--===== Create and populate a test table on the fly (this is NOT a part of the solution).
-- In the following comments, "b" is a blank and "E" is an element in the left to right order.
-- Double Quotes are used to encapsulate the output of "Item" so that you can see that all blanks
-- are preserved no matter where they may appear.
SELECT *
INTO #JBMTest
FROM ( --# & type of Return Row(s)
SELECT 0, NULL UNION ALL --1 NULL
SELECT 1, SPACE(0) UNION ALL --1 b (Empty String)
SELECT 2, SPACE(1) UNION ALL --1 b (1 space)
SELECT 3, SPACE(5) UNION ALL --1 b (5 spaces)
SELECT 4, ',' UNION ALL --2 b b (both are empty strings)
SELECT 5, '55555' UNION ALL --1 E
SELECT 6, ',55555' UNION ALL --2 b E
SELECT 7, ',55555,' UNION ALL --3 b E b
SELECT 8, '55555,' UNION ALL --2 b B
SELECT 9, '55555,1' UNION ALL --2 E E
SELECT 10, '1,55555' UNION ALL --2 E E
SELECT 11, '55555,4444,333,22,1' UNION ALL --5 E E E E E
SELECT 12, '55555,4444,,333,22,1' UNION ALL --6 E E b E E E
SELECT 13, ',55555,4444,,333,22,1,' UNION ALL --8 b E E b E E E b
SELECT 14, ',55555,4444,,,333,22,1,' UNION ALL --9 b E E b b E E E b
SELECT 15, ' 4444,55555 ' UNION ALL --2 E (w/Leading Space) E (w/Trailing Space)
SELECT 16, 'This,is,a,test.' --E E E E
) d (SomeID, SomeValue)
;
--===== Split the CSV column for the whole table using CROSS APPLY (this is the solution)
SELECT test.SomeID, test.SomeValue, split.ItemNumber, Item = QUOTENAME(split.Item,'"')
FROM #JBMTest test
CROSS APPLY dbo.DelimitedSplit8K(test.SomeValue,',') split
;
--=====================================================================================================================
-- TEST 2:
-- This tests for various "alpha" splits and COLLATION using all ASCII characters from 0 to 255 as a delimiter against
-- a given string. Note that not all of the delimiters will be visible and some will show up as tiny squares because
-- they are "control" characters. More specifically, this test will show you what happens to various non-accented
-- letters for your given collation depending on the delimiter you chose.
--=====================================================================================================================
WITH
cteBuildAllCharacters (String,Delimiter) AS
(
SELECT TOP 256
'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789',
CHAR(ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT NULL))-1)
FROM master.sys.all_columns
)
SELECT ASCII_Value = ASCII(c.Delimiter), c.Delimiter, split.ItemNumber, Item = QUOTENAME(split.Item,'"')
FROM cteBuildAllCharacters c
CROSS APPLY dbo.DelimitedSplit8K(c.String,c.Delimiter) split
ORDER BY ASCII_Value, split.ItemNumber
;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Notes:
1. Optimized for VARCHAR(8000) or less. No testing or error reporting for truncation at 8000 characters is done.
2. Optimized for single character delimiter. Multi-character delimiters should be resolvedexternally from this
function.
3. Optimized for use with CROSS APPLY.
4. Does not "trim" elements just in case leading or trailing blanks are intended.
5. If you don't know how a Tally table can be used to replace loops, please see the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/62867/
6. Changing this function to use NVARCHAR(MAX) will cause it to run twice as slow. It's just the nature of
VARCHAR(MAX) whether it fits in-row or not.
7. Multi-machine testing for the method of using UNPIVOT instead of 10 SELECT/UNION ALLs shows that the UNPIVOT method
is quite machine dependent and can slow things down quite a bit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credits:
This code is the product of many people's efforts including but not limited to the following:
cteTally concept originally by Iztek Ben Gan and "decimalized" by Lynn Pettis (and others) for a bit of extra speed
and finally redacted by Jeff Moden for a different slant on readability and compactness. Hat's off to Paul White for
his simple explanations of CROSS APPLY and for his detailed testing efforts. Last but not least, thanks to
Ron "BitBucket" McCullough and Wayne Sheffield for their extreme performance testing across multiple machines and
versions of SQL Server. The latest improvement brought an additional 15-20% improvement over Rev 05. Special thanks
to "Nadrek" and "peter-757102" (aka Peter de Heer) for bringing such improvements to light. Nadrek's original
improvement brought about a 10% performance gain and Peter followed that up with the content of Rev 07.
I also thank whoever wrote the first article I ever saw on "numbers tables" which is located at the following URL
and to Adam Machanic for leading me to it many years ago.
http://sqlserver2000.databases.aspfaq.com/why-should-i-consider-using-an-auxiliary-numbers-table.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revision History:
Rev 00 - 20 Jan 2010 - Concept for inline cteTally: Lynn Pettis and others.
Redaction/Implementation: Jeff Moden
- Base 10 redaction and reduction for CTE. (Total rewrite)
Rev 01 - 13 Mar 2010 - Jeff Moden
- Removed one additional concatenation and one subtraction from the SUBSTRING in the SELECT List for that tiny
bit of extra speed.
Rev 02 - 14 Apr 2010 - Jeff Moden
- No code changes. Added CROSS APPLY usage example to the header, some additional credits, and extra
documentation.
Rev 03 - 18 Apr 2010 - Jeff Moden
- No code changes. Added notes 7, 8, and 9 about certain "optimizations" that don't actually work for this
type of function.
Rev 04 - 29 Jun 2010 - Jeff Moden
- Added WITH SCHEMABINDING thanks to a note by Paul White. This prevents an unnecessary "Table Spool" when the
function is used in an UPDATE statement even though the function makes no external references.
Rev 05 - 02 Apr 2011 - Jeff Moden
- Rewritten for extreme performance improvement especially for larger strings approaching the 8K boundary and
for strings that have wider elements. The redaction of this code involved removing ALL concatenation of
delimiters, optimization of the maximum "N" value by using TOP instead of including it in the WHERE clause,
and the reduction of all previous calculations (thanks to the switch to a "zero based" cteTally) to just one
instance of one add and one instance of a subtract. The length calculation for the final element (not
followed by a delimiter) in the string to be split has been greatly simplified by using the ISNULL/NULLIF
combination to determine when the CHARINDEX returned a 0 which indicates there are no more delimiters to be
had or to start with. Depending on the width of the elements, this code is between 4 and 8 times faster on a
single CPU box than the original code especially near the 8K boundary.
- Modified comments to include more sanity checks on the usage example, etc.
- Removed "other" notes 8 and 9 as they were no longer applicable.
Rev 06 - 12 Apr 2011 - Jeff Moden
- Based on a suggestion by Ron "Bitbucket" McCullough, additional test rows were added to the sample code and
the code was changed to encapsulate the output in pipes so that spaces and empty strings could be perceived
in the output. The first "Notes" section was added. Finally, an extra test was added to the comments above.
Rev 07 - 06 May 2011 - Peter de Heer, a further 15-20% performance enhancement has been discovered and incorporated
into this code which also eliminated the need for a "zero" position in the cteTally table.
**********************************************************************************************************************/
--===== Define I/O parameters
(@pString VARCHAR(8000), @pDelimiter CHAR(1))
RETURNS TABLE WITH SCHEMABINDING AS
RETURN
--===== "Inline" CTE Driven "Tally Table" produces values from 1 up to 10,000...
-- enough to cover VARCHAR(8000)
WITH E1(N) AS (
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1
), --10E+1 or 10 rows
E2(N) AS (SELECT 1 FROM E1 a, E1 b), --10E+2 or 100 rows
E4(N) AS (SELECT 1 FROM E2 a, E2 b), --10E+4 or 10,000 rows max
cteTally(N) AS (--==== This provides the "base" CTE and limits the number of rows right up front
-- for both a performance gain and prevention of accidental "overruns"
SELECT TOP (ISNULL(DATALENGTH(@pString),0)) ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT NULL)) FROM E4
),
cteStart(N1) AS (--==== This returns N+1 (starting position of each "element" just once for each delimiter)
SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT t.N+1 FROM cteTally t WHERE SUBSTRING(@pString,t.N,1) = @pDelimiter
),
cteLen(N1,L1) AS(--==== Return start and length (for use in substring)
SELECT s.N1,
ISNULL(NULLIF(CHARINDEX(@pDelimiter,@pString,s.N1),0)-s.N1,8000)
FROM cteStart s
)
--===== Do the actual split. The ISNULL/NULLIF combo handles the length for the final element when no delimiter is found.
SELECT ItemNumber = ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY l.N1),
Item = SUBSTRING(@pString, l.N1, l.L1)
FROM cteLen l
;
是的，很长，但这主要是解释它及其历史的评论.别担心，它是 T-SQL 中最快的东西(AFAIK 只有 SQLCLR 更快，这不是 T-SQL).
Yes, it long, but that's mostly comments to explain it and its history. Don't worry, its the fastest thing available in T-SQL (AFAIK only SQLCLR is faster, and that's not T-SQL).
请注意，它最多只支持 VARCHAR(8000).如果你真的需要 VARCHAR(MAX)，那么它可以很容易地更改为那个，但 VARCHAR(MAX) 的速度大约是其两倍.
Note that it only supports up to VARCHAR(8000). If your really need VARCHAR(MAX), then it can be easily changed to that, but VARCHAR(MAX)'s are about twice as slow.
现在你可以像这样实现你的程序:
Now you can implement your procedure like this:
CREATE PROC [dbo].[GetFileContentsFromTitles]
@MyTitles varchar(max)
AS
SELECT *
INTO #tmpTitles
FROM dbo.DelimitedSplit8K(@MyTitles, ',')
SELECT [Title], [Sequence] From [dbo].[MasterSequence]
WHERE Title IN (SELECT item FROM #tmpTitles)
如果没有您的 DDL 和一些数据，我无法为您测试，但它应该会快得多.如果没有，那么我们可能需要在临时表中的 [item] 列上抛出一个索引.
I cannot test this for you without your DDL and some data, but it should be much faster. If not, then we may need to throw an index onto the [item] column in the temp table.
这是使用 VARCHAR(MAX) 的 split 函数的另一个版本:
Here's another version of the split function that uses VARCHAR(MAX):
ALTER FUNCTION [dbo].[DelimitedSplitMax]
/**********************************************************************************************************************
Purpose:
Split a given string at a given delimiter and return a list of the split elements (items).
Notes:
1. Leading a trailing delimiters are treated as if an empty string element were present.
2. Consecutive delimiters are treated as if an empty string element were present between them.
3. Except when spaces are used as a delimiter, all spaces present in each element are preserved.
Returns:
iTVF containing the following:
ItemNumber = Element position of Item as a BIGINT (not converted to INT to eliminate a CAST)
Item = Element value as a VARCHAR(MAX)
Statistics on this function may be found at the following URL:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1101315-203-4.aspx
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Notes:
1. Optimized for VARCHAR(8000) or less. No testing or error reporting for truncation at 8000 characters is done.
2. Optimized for single character delimiter. Multi-character delimiters should be resolvedexternally from this
function.
3. Optimized for use with CROSS APPLY.
4. Does not "trim" elements just in case leading or trailing blanks are intended.
5. If you don't know how a Tally table can be used to replace loops, please see the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/62867/
6. Changing this function to use NVARCHAR(MAX) will cause it to run twice as slow. It's just the nature of
VARCHAR(MAX) whether it fits in-row or not.
7. Multi-machine testing for the method of using UNPIVOT instead of 10 SELECT/UNION ALLs shows that the UNPIVOT method
is quite machine dependent and can slow things down quite a bit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credits:
This code is the product of many people's efforts including but not limited to the following:
cteTally concept originally by Iztek Ben Gan and "decimalized" by Lynn Pettis (and others) for a bit of extra speed
and finally redacted by Jeff Moden for a different slant on readability and compactness. Hat's off to Paul White for
his simple explanations of CROSS APPLY and for his detailed testing efforts. Last but not least, thanks to
Ron "BitBucket" McCullough and Wayne Sheffield for their extreme performance testing across multiple machines and
versions of SQL Server. The latest improvement brought an additional 15-20% improvement over Rev 05. Special thanks
to "Nadrek" and "peter-757102" (aka Peter de Heer) for bringing such improvements to light. Nadrek's original
improvement brought about a 10% performance gain and Peter followed that up with the content of Rev 07.
I also thank whoever wrote the first article I ever saw on "numbers tables" which is located at the following URL
and to Adam Machanic for leading me to it many years ago.
http://sqlserver2000.databases.aspfaq.com/why-should-i-consider-using-an-auxiliary-numbers-table.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revision History:
Rev 00 - 20 Jan 2010 - Concept for inline cteTally: Lynn Pettis and others.
Redaction/Implementation: Jeff Moden
- Base 10 redaction and reduction for CTE. (Total rewrite)
Rev 01 - 13 Mar 2010 - Jeff Moden
- Removed one additional concatenation and one subtraction from the SUBSTRING in the SELECT List for that tiny
bit of extra speed.
Rev 02 - 14 Apr 2010 - Jeff Moden
- No code changes. Added CROSS APPLY usage example to the header, some additional credits, and extra
documentation.
Rev 03 - 18 Apr 2010 - Jeff Moden
- No code changes. Added notes 7, 8, and 9 about certain "optimizations" that don't actually work for this
type of function.
Rev 04 - 29 Jun 2010 - Jeff Moden
- Added WITH SCHEMABINDING thanks to a note by Paul White. This prevents an unnecessary "Table Spool" when the
function is used in an UPDATE statement even though the function makes no external references.
Rev 05 - 02 Apr 2011 - Jeff Moden
- Rewritten for extreme performance improvement especially for larger strings approaching the 8K boundary and
for strings that have wider elements. The redaction of this code involved removing ALL concatenation of
delimiters, optimization of the maximum "N" value by using TOP instead of including it in the WHERE clause,
and the reduction of all previous calculations (thanks to the switch to a "zero based" cteTally) to just one
instance of one add and one instance of a subtract. The length calculation for the final element (not
followed by a delimiter) in the string to be split has been greatly simplified by using the ISNULL/NULLIF
combination to determine when the CHARINDEX returned a 0 which indicates there are no more delimiters to be
had or to start with. Depending on the width of the elements, this code is between 4 and 8 times faster on a
single CPU box than the original code especially near the 8K boundary.
- Modified comments to include more sanity checks on the usage example, etc.
- Removed "other" notes 8 and 9 as they were no longer applicable.
Rev 06 - 12 Apr 2011 - Jeff Moden
- Based on a suggestion by Ron "Bitbucket" McCullough, additional test rows were added to the sample code and
the code was changed to encapsulate the output in pipes so that spaces and empty strings could be perceived
in the output. The first "Notes" section was added. Finally, an extra test was added to the comments above.
Rev 07 - 06 May 2011 - Peter de Heer, a further 15-20% performance enhancement has been discovered and incorporated
into this code which also eliminated the need for a "zero" position in the cteTally table.
Rev 07a- 18 Oct 2012 - RBarryYoung, Varchar(MAX), because its needed, even though its slower...
**********************************************************************************************************************/
--===== Define I/O parameters
(@pString VARCHAR(MAX), @pDelimiter CHAR(1))
RETURNS TABLE WITH SCHEMABINDING AS
RETURN
--===== "Inline" CTE Driven "Tally Table" produces values from 1 up to 100,000,000...
-- hopefully enough to cover most VARCHAR(MAX)'s
WITH E1(N) AS (
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 1
), --10E+1 or 10 rows
E2(N) AS (SELECT 1 FROM E1 a, E1 b), --10E+2 or 100 rows
E4(N) AS (SELECT 1 FROM E2 a, E2 b), --10E+4 or 10,000 rows max
E8(N) AS (SELECT 1 FROM E4 a, E4 b), --10E+8 or 100,000,000 rows max
cteTally(N) AS (--==== This provides the "base" CTE and limits the number of rows right up front
-- for both a performance gain and prevention of accidental "overruns"
SELECT TOP (ISNULL(DATALENGTH(@pString),0)) ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT NULL)) FROM E8
),
cteStart(N1) AS (--==== This returns N+1 (starting position of each "element" just once for each delimiter)
SELECT 1 UNION ALL
SELECT t.N+1 FROM cteTally t WHERE SUBSTRING(@pString,t.N,1) = @pDelimiter
),
cteLen(N1,L1) AS(--==== Return start and length (for use in substring)
SELECT s.N1,
ISNULL(NULLIF(CHARINDEX(@pDelimiter,@pString,s.N1),0)-s.N1,999999999)
FROM cteStart s
)
--===== Do the actual split. The ISNULL/NULLIF combo handles the length for the final element when no delimiter is found.
SELECT ItemNumber = ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY l.N1),
Item = SUBSTRING(@pString, l.N1, l.L1)
FROM cteLen l
;
但是请注意，我仅将其设置为最多 100,000,000 个字符.另外，我还没有机会测试它，你一定要自己测试一下.
Be forewarned, however, that I only set it up to count up to 100,000,000 characters. Also, I have not had a chance to test it yet, you should be sure to test it yourself.
这篇关于传入的大列表上的 sql server 2008 过滤器的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
查看全文
