[Maria-developers] Updated (by Monty): Index usage tracker (103)
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b38aed4ff9d39949c1acd04e43a0c640.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
----------------------------------------------------------------------- WORKLOG TASK -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- TASK...........: Index usage tracker CREATION DATE..: Wed, 10 Mar 2010, 11:29 SUPERVISOR.....: Bothorsen IMPLEMENTOR....: COPIES TO......: CATEGORY.......: Client-BackLog TASK ID........: 103 (http://askmonty.org/worklog/?tid=103) VERSION........: Server-9.x STATUS.........: Complete PRIORITY.......: 60 WORKED HOURS...: 0 ESTIMATE.......: 0 (hours remain) ORIG. ESTIMATE.: 0 PROGRESS NOTES: -=-=(Monty - Thu, 01 Apr 2010, 12:00)=-=- Version updated. --- /tmp/wklog.103.old.21119 2010-04-01 12:00:42.000000000 +0000 +++ /tmp/wklog.103.new.21119 2010-04-01 12:00:42.000000000 +0000 @@ -1 +1 @@ -Benchmarks-3.0 +Server-9.x -=-=(Monty - Thu, 01 Apr 2010, 12:00)=-=- Status updated. --- /tmp/wklog.103.old.21119 2010-04-01 12:00:42.000000000 +0000 +++ /tmp/wklog.103.new.21119 2010-04-01 12:00:42.000000000 +0000 @@ -1 +1 @@ -Un-Assigned +Complete -=-=(Monty - Thu, 01 Apr 2010, 12:00)=-=- High Level Description modified. --- /tmp/wklog.103.old.21108 2010-04-01 12:00:33.000000000 +0000 +++ /tmp/wklog.103.new.21108 2010-04-01 12:00:33.000000000 +0000 @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +Update: We have already in MariaDB 5.2 SHOW INDEX STATISTICS that provides the +requested information. + + What indexes are needed is often easy to find. What is more difficult is to find which indexes are not used at all. @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ 12 | +------------+------------+--------------+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------+------------+----------+-----------+-----------+------------+ + Possibly this could/should be implemented on the handler interface level because there we know what we are touching? But I am not familiar with the code. -=-=(Shinguz - Wed, 10 Mar 2010, 11:30)=-=- High Level Description modified. --- /tmp/wklog.103.old.30875 2010-03-10 11:30:45.000000000 +0000 +++ /tmp/wklog.103.new.30875 2010-03-10 11:30:45.000000000 +0000 @@ -35,3 +35,6 @@ Possibly this could/should be implemented on the handler interface level because there we know what we are touching? But I am not familiar with the code. + +If some more specification is need for implementation let me know and I will +collect the stuff from the sources mentioned above. DESCRIPTION: Update: We have already in MariaDB 5.2 SHOW INDEX STATISTICS that provides the requested information. What indexes are needed is often easy to find. What is more difficult is to find which indexes are not used at all. Thus some statistics about the index usage would be nice. I think Percona has already something like this done some time ago. And big O has similar functionality. I could imagine something like this: +------------+------------+--------------+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------+------------+----------+-----------+-----------+------------+ | table_name | index_name | index_length | create_time | update_time | use_time | read_first | read_key | read_next | full_scan | range_scan | +------------+------------+--------------+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------+------------+----------+-----------+-----------+------------+ | test_table | idx1 | 1234567890 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-03-10 11:34:56 | 1234 | 42560 | 2468 | 234 | 321 | | test_table | idx2 | 123456 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | NULL | NULL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | test_table | idx3 | 234561 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-03-10 11:12:34 | 2010-03-10 11:34:56 | 7890 | 89890 | 15780 | 678 | 321 | | test_table | idx4 | 345612 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-03-10 11:34:56 | NULL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | test_table | idx5 | 456123 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-03-10 06:56:12 | NULL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | test_table | idx6 | 561234 | 2010-01-01 00:00:00 | 2010-03-10 01:12:34 | 2010-03-10 11:34:42 | 3456 | 12356 | 6912 | 123 | 12 | +------------+------------+--------------+---------------------+---------------------+---------------------+------------+----------+-----------+-----------+------------+ Possibly this could/should be implemented on the handler interface level because there we know what we are touching? But I am not familiar with the code. If some more specification is need for implementation let me know and I will collect the stuff from the sources mentioned above. ESTIMATED WORK TIME ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------- WorkLog (v3.5.9)
participants (1)
-
worklog-noreply@askmonty.org