Mailing-List: contact user-java-help@ibatis.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user-java@ibatis.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:03:10 +1000
Subject: Re: OT: COUNT query speed issue
From: Zoran Avtarovski <zoran@sparecreative.com>
To: <user-java@ibatis.apache.org>,
	Larry Meadors <larry.meadors@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BED896AE.100CC%zoran@sparecreative.com>
In-Reply-To: <a10a823c05061620572b79a199@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Thanks for the suggestion Larry,

That's exactly what I was thinking, but I guess I was concerned that it was
overkill. Do you know if there are some example approaches or methodologies
I can read up on.

Z.

> Is this historical data? What I mean by that is, does it change frequently?
> 
> If not, maybe a better approach would be to periodically create a
> table with the data in a summarized form.
> 
>> From the original email, it sounds like this approach may work for
> data where the log_time is before today, but maybe not for today's
> data. If that is the case, you could union the two queries (one over
> the historical data, and one over the live data for today).
> 
> Larry
> 
> On 6/16/05, Zoran Avtarovski <zoran@sparecreative.com> wrote:
>>> Do things get faster if you have the database index remote_id and
>>> log_time?
>>> 
>> The log_time column is indexed, but I couldn't work out how to index two
>> columns in mysql.
>> 
>> Z.
>> 
>> 
>>