MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

来源：动视网责编：小采时间：2020-11-09 21:16:19

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解:MySQL中存储时间通常会用datetime类型，但现在很多系统也用int存储unix时间戳，它们有什么区别？本人总结如下： int （1）4个字节存储，INT的长度是4个字节，存储空间上比datatime少，int索引存储空间也相对较小，排序和查询效率相对较高一点点（2）可读

推荐度：

点击下载本文 文档为doc格式

导读MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解:MySQL中存储时间通常会用datetime类型，但现在很多系统也用int存储unix时间戳，它们有什么区别？本人总结如下： int （1）4个字节存储，INT的长度是4个字节，存储空间上比datatime少，int索引存储空间也相对较小，排序和查询效率相对较高一点点（2）可读

执行mysql

mysql> select * from test_datetime into outfile ‘/tmp/test_datetime.sql';
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected (6.19 sec)

mysql> select * from test_timestamp into outfile ‘/tmp/test_timestamp.sql';
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected (8.75 sec)

mysql> select * from test_int into outfile ‘/tmp/test_int.sql';
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected (4.29 sec)

alter table test_datetime rename test_int;
alter table test_int add column datetimeint INT NOT NULL;
update test_int set datetimeint = UNIX_TIMESTAMP(datetime);
alter table test_int drop column datetime;
alter table test_int change column datetimeint datetime int not null;
select * from test_int into outfile ‘/tmp/test_int2.sql';
drop table test_int;

So now I have exactly the same timestamps from the DATETIME test, and it will be possible to reuse the originals for TIMESTAMP tests as well.

mysql> load data infile ‘/export/home/ntavares/test_datetime.sql' into table test_datetime;
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected (41.52 sec)
Records: 10000000 Deleted: 0 Skipped: 0 Warnings: 0

mysql> load data infile ‘/export/home/ntavares/test_datetime.sql' into table test_timestamp;
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected, 44 warnings (48.32 sec)
Records: 10000000 Deleted: 0 Skipped: 0 Warnings: 44

mysql> load data infile ‘/export/home/ntavares/test_int2.sql' into table test_int;
Query OK, 10000000 rows affected (37.73 sec)
Records: 10000000 Deleted: 0 Skipped: 0 Warnings: 0

As expected, since INT is simply stored as is while the others have to be recalculated. Notice how TIMESTAMP still performs worse, even though uses half of DATETIME storage size.

Let's check the performance of full table scan:

mysql> SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE count(id) FROM test_datetime WHERE datetime > ‘1970-01-01 01:30:00′ AND datetime < ‘1970-01-01 01:35:00′;
+———–+
| count(id) |
+———–+
| 211991 |
+———–+
1 row in set (3.93 sec)

mysql> SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE count(id) FROM test_timestamp WHERE datetime > ‘1970-01-01 01:30:00′ AND datetime < ‘1970-01-01 01:35:00′;
+———–+
| count(id) |
+———–+
| 211991 |
+———–+
1 row in set (9.87 sec)

mysql> SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE count(id) FROM test_int WHERE datetime > UNIX_TIMESTAMP('1970-01-01 01:30:00′) AND datetime < UNIX_TIMESTAMP('1970-01-01 01:35:00′);
+———–+
| count(id) |
+———–+
| 211991 |
+———–+
1 row in set (15.12 sec)

Then again, TIMESTAMP performs worse and the recalculations seemed to impact, so the next good thing to test seemed to be without those recalculations: find the equivalents of those UNIX_TIMESTAMP() values, and use them instead:

mysql> select UNIX_TIMESTAMP('1970-01-01 01:30:00′) AS lower, UNIX_TIMESTAMP('1970-01-01 01:35:00′) AS bigger;
+——-+——–+
| lower | bigger |
+——-+——–+
| 1800 | 2100 |
+——-+——–+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

mysql> SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE count(id) FROM test_int WHERE datetime > 1800 AND datetime < 2100;
+———–+
| count(id) |
+———–+
| 211991 |
+———–+
1 row in set (1.94 sec)

Innodb:MySQL DATETIME vs TIMESTAMP vs INT performance and benchmarking with InnoDB

总结

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

推荐度：

点击下载本文 文档为doc格式

标签：选择类型存储

热门焦点

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

最新推荐

猜你喜欢

热门推荐