Question

I have an SQL query (generated by LINQ to Entities) which is roughly like the following:

SELECT * FROM [mydb].[dbo].[employees]
JOIN [mydb].[dbo].[industry]
  ON jobs.industryId = industry.id
JOIN [mydb].[dbo].[state]
  ON jobs.stateId = state.id
JOIN [mydb].[dbo].[positionType]
  ON jobs.positionTypeId = positionType.id
JOIN [mydb].[dbo].[payPer]
  ON jobs.salaryPerId = payPer.id
JOIN [mydb].[dbo].[country]
  ON jobs.countryId = country.id
WHERE countryName = 'US'
ORDER BY startDatetime

The query returns about 1200 rows, which I don’t think is a huge amount. Unfortunately it also takes ~16 seconds. Without the ORDER BY, the query takes <1 second.

I’ve used SQL Server Management Studio to put an index on the startDatetime column, and also a clustered index on “cityId, industryId, startDatetime, positionTypeId, payPerId, stateId” (i.e. all of the columns in “jobs” that we use in JOINs and on the column we use ORDER BY on). I already have individual indexes on each of the columns we use in JOINs. Unfortunately this hasn’t made the query any faster.

I ran a showplan and got:

   |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[cityId]))
       |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[stateId]))
       |    |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[industryId]))
       |    |    |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[positionTypeId]))
       |    |    |    |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[salaryPerId]))
       |    |    |    |    |--Sort(ORDER BY:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[issueDatetime] ASC))
       |    |    |    |    |    |--Hash Match(Inner Join, HASH:([mydb].[dbo].[currency].[id])=([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[salaryCurrencyId]))
       |    |    |    |    |         |--Index Scan(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[currency].[IX_currency]))
       |    |    |    |    |         |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, WHERE:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[countryId]=[mydb].[dbo].[country].[id]))
       |    |    |    |    |              |--Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[country].[IX_country]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[country].[countryName]='US') ORDERED FORWARD)
       |    |    |    |    |              |--Clustered Index Scan(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[PK_jobs]))
       |    |    |    |    |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[payPer].[PK_payPer]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[payPer].[id]=[mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[salaryPerId]) ORDERED FORWARD)
       |    |    |    |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[positionType].[PK_positionType]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[positionType].[id]=[mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[positionTypeId]) ORDERED FORWARD)
       |    |    |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[industry].[PK_industry]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[industry].[id]=[mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[industryId]) ORDERED FORWARD)
       |    |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[state].[PK_state]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[state].[id]=[mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[stateId]) ORDERED FORWARD)
       |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([mydb].[dbo].[city].[PK_city]), SEEK:([mydb].[dbo].[city].[id]=[mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[cityId]) ORDERED FORWARD)

The important line seems to be “|–Sort(ORDER BY:([mydb].[dbo].[jobs].[issueDatetime] ASC))” — without any mention of an index on that column.

Why is my ORDER BY making my query so much slower, and how can I speed up my query?

Answer 1

If your query does not contain an order by then it will return the data in whatever order it was found. There is no guarantee that the data will even be returned in the same order when you run the query again.

When you include an order by clause, the database has to build a list of the rows in the correct order and then return the data in that order. This can take a lot of extra processing which translates into extra time.

It probably takes longer to sort a large number of columns, which your query might be returning. At some point you will run out of buffer space and the database will have to start swapping and performance will go downhill.

Try returning less columns (specify the columns you need instead of select *) and see if the query runs faster.