相关子查询导致的性能差

大多数情况下，您希望避免相关子查询。如果子查询中存在对外部查询的列的引用，则子查询是相关的。当发生这种情况时，对于返回的每一行至少执行一次子查询，如果在应用包含相关子查询的条件之后应用其他条件，则可以执行更多次。

请原谅这个不自然的示例和Oracle语法，但假设您想要找到自上次商店每天销售额低于10,000美元以来在任何商店中雇用的所有员工。

select e.first_name, e.last_name
from employee e
where e.start_date > 
        (select max(ds.transaction_date)
         from daily_sales ds
         where ds.store_id = e.store_id and
               ds.total < 10000)

本例中的子查询通过store_id与外部查询相关联，并将对系统中的每个员工执行。优化此查询的一种方法是将子查询移动到内联视图。

select e.first_name, e.last_name
from employee e,
     (select ds.store_id,
             max(s.transaction_date) transaction_date
      from daily_sales ds
      where ds.total < 10000
      group by s.store_id) dsx
where e.store_id = dsx.store_id and
      e.start_date > dsx.transaction_date

In this example, the query in the from clause is now an inline-view (again some Oracle specific syntax) and is only executed once. Depending on your data model, this query will probably execute much faster. It would perform better than the first query as the number of employees grew. The first query could actually perform better if there were few employees and many stores (and perhaps many of stores had no employees) and the daily_sales table was indexed on store_id. This is not a likely scenario but shows how a correlated query could possibly perform better than an alternative.

我曾多次看到初级开发人员关联子查询，这通常会对性能产生严重影响。但是，当删除一个相关的子查询时，一定要查看之前和之后的解释计划，以确保您没有使性能变差。

过度使用和/或依赖存储过程。

一些应用程序开发人员将存储过程视为中间层/前端代码的直接扩展。这似乎是微软堆栈开发人员的一个共同特征(我是其中之一，但我已经不再这样做了)，并产生许多执行复杂业务逻辑和工作流处理的存储过程。这在其他地方做得更好。

存储过程在某些实际技术因素(例如性能和安全性)需要使用时非常有用。例如，保持大型数据集的聚合/过滤“接近数据”。

我最近不得不帮助维护和增强一个大型Delphi桌面应用程序，其中70%的业务逻辑和规则是在1400个SQL Server存储过程中实现的(其余在UI事件处理程序中)。这是一场噩梦，主要是由于难以将有效的单元测试引入TSQL，缺乏封装和糟糕的工具(调试器，编辑器)。

在过去与Java团队一起工作时，我很快发现在那个环境中，情况往往完全相反。一位Java架构师曾经告诉我:“数据库是用于数据的，而不是用于代码的。”

现在，我认为完全不考虑存储过程是错误的，但在它们提供有用好处的情况下，应该谨慎使用(不是默认情况)(参见其他答案)。

开发人员所犯的关键数据库设计和编程错误

Selfish database design and usage. Developers often treat the database as their personal persistent object store without considering the needs of other stakeholders in the data. This also applies to application architects. Poor database design and data integrity makes it hard for third parties working with the data and can substantially increase the system's life cycle costs. Reporting and MIS tends to be a poor cousin in application design and only done as an afterthought. Abusing denormalised data. Overdoing denormalised data and trying to maintain it within the application is a recipe for data integrity issues. Use denormalisation sparingly. Not wanting to add a join to a query is not an excuse for denormalising. Scared of writing SQL. SQL isn't rocket science and is actually quite good at doing its job. O/R mapping layers are quite good at doing the 95% of queries that are simple and fit well into that model. Sometimes SQL is the best way to do the job. Dogmatic 'No Stored Procedures' policies. Regardless of whether you believe stored procedures are evil, this sort of dogmatic attitude has no place on a software project. Not understanding database design. Normalisation is your friend and it's not rocket science. Joining and cardinality are fairly simple concepts - if you're involved in database application development there's really no excuse for not understanding them.

1)不了解如何正确地在Java和数据库之间进行交互。

2)过度解析，不恰当或没有重用SQL

3)没有使用BIND变量

4)在数据库中使用SQL集逻辑时，用Java实现过程逻辑(更好)。

5)在投入生产前没有进行任何合理的性能或可伸缩性测试

6)使用水晶报表，在报表中没有正确设置模式名

7)由于不了解执行计划，使用笛卡尔式产品实现SQL(你甚至看了EXPLAIN计划吗?)

这里有一个视频链接，名为“经典数据库开发错误和克服它们的五种方法”，作者是Scott Walz

不了解DBMS的工作原理。

如果不了解离合器的工作原理，你就不能正确地驾驶变速杆。如果不了解实际上只是在硬盘上写入文件，就无法理解如何使用数据库。

具体地说:

Do you know what a Clustered Index is? Did you think about it when you designed your schema? Do you know how to use indexes properly? How to reuse an index? Do you know what a Covering Index is? So great, you have indexes. How big is 1 row in your index? How big will the index be when you have a lot of data? Will that fit easily into memory? If it won't it's useless as an index. Have you ever used EXPLAIN in MySQL? Great. Now be honest with yourself: Did you understand even half of what you saw? No, you probably didn't. Fix that. Do you understand the Query Cache? Do you know what makes a query un-cachable? Are you using MyISAM? If you NEED full text search, MyISAM's is crap anyway. Use Sphinx. Then switch to Inno.