I know we can do correlated subqueries and join. But which one is faster? Is there a golden rule or I must measure both?
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I know we can do correlated subqueries and join. But which one is faster? Is there a golden rule or I must measure both?
First, a correlated subquery really is a type of join. There is no golden rule about which produces the best execution plan. If you are interested in performance, you need to try out the different forms to see what works best. Or, at least, look at the execution plans to make that decision.
In general, I tend to avoid correlated subqueries for a couple of reasons. First, they can almost always be written without the correlation. Second, many query engines turn them into nested loop joins (albeit using indexes), and other join strategies might be better. In such cases, correlated subqueries make it difficult to parallelize the query. Third, correlated subqueries are usually in either the SELECT or WHERE clauses. I like for all my tables to be in the FROM clause.
In MySQL however, correlated subqueries are often the most efficient way to do a query. This is especially true when using a subquery in an
INclause. So, there is no golden rule.