Posted by Zamdrist on 03/23/07 18:51

On Mar 23, 12:38 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_deletet...@greenms.com> wrote:
>
> Just so you know, these aren't very large tables.
>
> However, I'd definitely agree you probably want some indexes.
>
> However, the question you're asking is a bit too generic. You probably need
> to look at what queries you're doing and optimize for those specifically.
>
> And generally you want to find not necessarily the longest running queries,
> but the ones called the most. If you have one query called 10 times a day
> that runs for 10 minutes and optimize it 10%, you'll save 10 minutes a day.
>
> If you have one query called 10,000 times a day for a minute and optimize it
> 10%, you'll save 1000 minutes.

A million records isn't large? Ok.

An application I didn't write and have NO support for is accessing the
data, reading & writing to these tables. There *are* indexes but only
one each and only on the primary key field.

I have no access to the queries as the application is reading from the
tables, probably using in-line string & code queries. There are no
views or procedures used by the application (well very few and not in
this instance). For all I know it could be using "Select * From
TableName...".

There are only 4 fields in each table, so I suppose the query(ies)
could only so complex as four fields would allow for. I know what one
of the fields ties back into a more widely used table that does have
more indexes, ones that appear to be useful.

Thanks

[Back to original message]