神刀安全网

Reconciling set-based operations with row-by-row iterative processing

Yesterday in class we had a discussion around the conceptual problem of reconciling the fact that SQL Server does set-based operations, but that it does them in query plans that pass single rows around between operators. In other words, it uses iterative processing to implement set-based operators.

The crux of the discussion is: if SQL Server is passing single rows around, how is that set-based operations?

I explained it in two different ways…

SQL Server Example

This explanation compares two ways of doing the following logical operation using SQL Server: update all the rows in the Products table where ProductType = 1 and set the Price field to be 10% higher.

The cursor based way (row-by-agonizing-row, or RBAR) would be something like the following:

DECLARE @ProductID   INT; DECLARE @Price       FLOAT;  DECLARE [MyUpdate] CURSOR FAST_FORWARD FOR SELECT [ProductID], [Price] FROM [Products] WHERE [ProductType] = 1;  OPEN [MyUpdate];  FETCH NEXT FROM [MyUpdate] INTO @ProductID, @Price;  WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0 BEGIN     UPDATE [Products]     SET [Price] = @Price * 1.1     WHERE [ProductID] = @ProductID;      FETCH NEXT FROM [MyUpdate] INTO @ProductID, @Price; END  CLOSE [MyUpdate]; DEALLOCATE [MyUpdate];

This method has to set up a scan over the Products table based on the ProductType , and then runs a separate UPDATE transaction for each row returned from the scan, incurring all the overhead of setting up the UPDATE  query, starting the transaction, seeking to the correct row based on the ProductID , updating it, and tearing down the transaction and query framework again each time.

The set-based way of doing it would be:

UPDATE [Products] SET [Price] = [Price] * 1.1 WHERE [ProductType] = 1;

This will have one scan based on the ProductType , which will update rows matching the ProductType , but the query, transaction, and scan are only set up once, and then all the rows are processed, one-at-a-time inside SQL Server.

The difference is that in the set-based way, all the iteration is done inside SQL Server, in the most efficient way it can, rather than manually iterating outside of SQL Server using the cursor.

Non-Technical Example

This explanation involves a similar problem but not involving SQL Server. Imagine you need to acquire twelve 4′ x 8′ plywood sheets from your local home improvement store.

You could drive to and from the store twelve times, and each time you need to go into the store, purchase the sheet, and wait for a staff member to become available to load the sheet into your pickup truck, then drive home and unload the sheet.

Or you could drive to the store once and purchase all twelve sheets in one go, with maybe four staff members making three trips each out to your pickup, carrying one sheet each time. Or even just one staff member making twelve trips out to your pickup.

Which method is more efficient? Multiple trips to the store or one trip to the store, no matter how many staff members are available to carry the sheets out?

Summary

No-one in their right mind is going to make twelve trips to the home improvement store when one will suffice. Just like no developer should be writing cursor/RBAR code to perform an operation that SQL Server can do in a set-based manner (when possible).

Set-based operations don’t mean that SQL Server processes the whole set at once – that’s clearly not possible as most sets have more rows than your server has processors (so all the rows in the set simply *can’t* be processed at the same time, even if all processors were running the same code at the same time) – but that it can process the set very, very efficiently by only constructing the processing framework (i.e. query plan with operators, scans, etc.) for the operation once and then iterating over the set of rows inside this framework.

转载本站任何文章请注明:转载至神刀安全网,谢谢神刀安全网 » Reconciling set-based operations with row-by-row iterative processing

分享到:更多 ()

评论 抢沙发

  • 昵称 (必填)
  • 邮箱 (必填)
  • 网址