Users may see cases where their query is slower than expected, in the belief they are ordering or filtering by a primary key. In this article we show how users can confirm the key is used, highlighting common reasons its not.
INSERT INTO logs SELECT
['200', '404', '502', '403'][toInt32(randBinomial(4, 0.1)) + 1] AS code,
now() + toIntervalMinute(number) AS timestamp
FROM numbers(100000000)
0 rows in set. Elapsed: 15.845 sec. Processed 100.00 million rows, 800.00 MB (6.31 million rows/s., 50.49 MB/s.)
SELECT count()
FROM logs
┌───count()─┐
│ 100000000 │ -- 100.00 million
└───────────┘
1 row in set. Elapsed: 0.002 sec.
Notice how the number of granules scanned 8012 is a fraction of the total 12209. The section higlighted below, confirms use of the primary key code.
PrimaryKey
Keys:
code
Granules are the unit of data processing in ClickHouse, with each typically holding 8192 rows. For further details on granules and how they are filtered we recommend reading this guide.
Note
Filtering on keys later in an ordering key will not be as efficient as filtering on those that are earlier in the tuple. For reasons why, see here
ClickHouse can also exploit ordering keys for efficient sorting. Specifically,
When the optimize_read_in_order setting is enabled (by default), the ClickHouse server uses the table index and reads the data in order of the ORDER BY key. This allows us to avoid reading all data in case of specified LIMIT. So, queries on big data with small limits are processed faster. See here and here for further details.
This, however, requires alignment of the keys used.
The line MergeTreeSelect(pool: ReadPool, algorithm: Thread) here does not indicate the use of the optimization but rather a standard read. This is caused by our table ordering key using toUnixTimestamp(Timestamp)NOTtimestamp. Rectifying this mismatch addresses the issue: