Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

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.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 214847
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T18:24:48+00:00 2026-05-11T18:24:48+00:00

Our environment: Drupal+MySQL Examining the query log indicates that the following query, originating from

  • 0

Our environment:
Drupal+MySQL

Examining the query log indicates that the following query, originating from Drupal core’s node_load function is taking considerable amount of time.

EXPLAIN on the node_load query reveals that the index is not used on the USER table.

mysql> explain SELECT n.nid, n.vid, n.type, n.status, n.created, n.changed, 
    n.comment, n.promote, n.sticky, r.timestamp AS revision_timestamp, r.title, 
    r.body, r.teaser, r.log, r.format, u.uid, u.name, u.picture, u.data 
FROM xyz_node n 
INNER JOIN xyz_users u ON n.uid = u.uid 
INNER JOIN xyz_node_revisions r ON r.vid = n.vid;

+----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+--------------+------+-------------+
| id | select_type | table | type   | possible_keys | key     | key_len | ref          | rows | Extra       |
+----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+--------------+------+-------------+
|  1 | SIMPLE      | u     | ALL    | PRIMARY       | NULL    | NULL    | NULL         |  181 |             | 
|  1 | SIMPLE      | n     | ref    | vid,uid       | uid     | 4       | xyz.u.uid |    9 | Using where | 
|  1 | SIMPLE      | r     | eq_ref | PRIMARY       | PRIMARY | 4       | xyz.n.vid |    1 |             | 
+----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------+---------+---------+--------------+------+-------------+

Any idea what could be going on, and how i could force MYSQL to use Index on this query?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 1 View
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-11T18:24:49+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 6:24 pm

    Tables are not necessarily joined in the order that they are specified in the FROM clause. In this case, it looks like MySQL has decided that in the absence of a WHERE clause in the query, it’s probably fastest to scan the users table first, and then join that with the other tables.

    The first thing I would do would be to run ANALYZE TABLE on all three tables involved in the query. This updates table statistics and stored key distributions, and allows the join optimizer to make better decisions. Run the EXPLAIN statement afterwards and see if it has changed.

    If it hasn’t changed, you might need to resort to using the STRAIGHT_JOIN keyword. This forces the join optimizer to join the tables in the exact order specified in the query. To help determine if you should do this, you’re supposed to take the product of all the rows values from an EXPLAIN result, and compare it to the actual number of rows returned from the query. So in this case, compare 1629 (181x9x1) to the actual number of rows. If they are significantly different, a STRAIGHT_JOIN might be called for (used as a keyword to SELECT, ie. SELECT STRAIGHT_JOIN n.nid… etc).

    As an aside, there is a way to tell MySQL to use a specific index, but I don’t think it would work for your user table in this query as it is right now, since there is no WHERE clause. If you end up using STRAIGHT_JOIN, you might possibly need it, but in that case MySQL would likely pick up on the primary key if the user table was not the first table in the join.

    You should have a look at the EXPLAIN syntax page for more helpful details on this as well.

    This query doesn’t look like it should be that slow for what it is. Without a where clause, you can expect a full-table scan somewhere, and MySQL has kept it down to about 1700 total rows examined. It seems like this would only be a problem if it was a high-use query, in which case you might want to examine the underlying architecture that (without a WHERE clause) involves running a query which will affect every user in the system, and will only get heavier as more users are added.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 113k
  • Answers 113k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer To detect a "shake" you would check the g-force generated.… May 11, 2026 at 10:06 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer I resolved this problem by replacing all instances of COMCTL32.OCX,… May 11, 2026 at 10:06 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer I had a similar situation where I had to provide… May 11, 2026 at 10:06 pm

Related Questions

Our environment uses the ODP.Net oracle database driver. So logically we are using Oracle
In our environment we have a Lib folder which contains various third party assemblies
Our current Intranet environment is a little outdated. The current stack has ASP.NET 1.1/2.0
NHibernate is not really a good fit for our environment due to all the
I'm setting up some monitoring on a few SQL Servers. Currently our environment uses

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.