2016-03-04 07:08:24 -05:00
|
|
|
# SQL Query Guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This document describes various guidelines to follow when writing SQL queries,
|
|
|
|
either using ActiveRecord/Arel or raw SQL queries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Using LIKE Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most common way to search for data is using the `LIKE` statement. For
|
|
|
|
example, to get all issues with a title starting with "WIP:" you'd write the
|
|
|
|
following query:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM issues
|
|
|
|
WHERE title LIKE 'WIP:%';
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On PostgreSQL the `LIKE` statement is case-sensitive. On MySQL this depends on
|
|
|
|
the case-sensitivity of the collation, which is usually case-insensitive. To
|
|
|
|
perform a case-insensitive `LIKE` on PostgreSQL you have to use `ILIKE` instead.
|
|
|
|
This statement in turn isn't supported on MySQL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To work around this problem you should write `LIKE` queries using Arel instead
|
|
|
|
of raw SQL fragments as Arel automatically uses `ILIKE` on PostgreSQL and `LIKE`
|
|
|
|
on MySQL. This means that instead of this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
Issue.where('title LIKE ?', 'WIP:%')
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'd write this instead:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
Issue.where(Issue.arel_table[:title].matches('WIP:%'))
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here `matches` generates the correct `LIKE` / `ILIKE` statement depending on the
|
|
|
|
database being used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you need to chain multiple `OR` conditions you can also do this using Arel:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
table = Issue.arel_table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issue.where(table[:title].matches('WIP:%').or(table[:foo].matches('WIP:%')))
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For PostgreSQL this produces:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM issues
|
|
|
|
WHERE (title ILIKE 'WIP:%' OR foo ILIKE 'WIP:%')
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In turn for MySQL this produces:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM issues
|
|
|
|
WHERE (title LIKE 'WIP:%' OR foo LIKE 'WIP:%')
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## LIKE & Indexes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neither PostgreSQL nor MySQL use any indexes when using `LIKE` / `ILIKE` with a
|
|
|
|
wildcard at the start. For example, this will not use any indexes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM issues
|
|
|
|
WHERE title ILIKE '%WIP:%';
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because the value for `ILIKE` starts with a wildcard the database is not able to
|
|
|
|
use an index as it doesn't know where to start scanning the indexes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MySQL provides no known solution to this problem. Luckily PostgreSQL _does_
|
|
|
|
provide a solution: trigram GIN indexes. These indexes can be created as
|
|
|
|
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY] index_name_here
|
|
|
|
ON table_name
|
|
|
|
USING GIN(column_name gin_trgm_ops);
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The key here is the `GIN(column_name gin_trgm_ops)` part. This creates a [GIN
|
|
|
|
index][gin-index] with the operator class set to `gin_trgm_ops`. These indexes
|
|
|
|
_can_ be used by `ILIKE` / `LIKE` and can lead to greatly improved performance.
|
|
|
|
One downside of these indexes is that they can easily get quite large (depending
|
|
|
|
on the amount of data indexed).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To keep naming of these indexes consistent please use the following naming
|
|
|
|
pattern:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
index_TABLE_on_COLUMN_trigram
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, a GIN/trigram index for `issues.title` would be called
|
|
|
|
`index_issues_on_title_trigram`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to these indexes taking quite some time to be built they should be built
|
|
|
|
concurrently. This can be done by using `CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY` instead of
|
|
|
|
just `CREATE INDEX`. Concurrent indexes can _not_ be created inside a
|
|
|
|
transaction. Transactions for migrations can be disabled using the following
|
|
|
|
pattern:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
2018-12-12 10:38:40 -05:00
|
|
|
class MigrationName < ActiveRecord::Migration[4.2]
|
2016-03-04 07:08:24 -05:00
|
|
|
disable_ddl_transaction!
|
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
2018-12-12 10:38:40 -05:00
|
|
|
class AddUsersLowerUsernameEmailIndexes < ActiveRecord::Migration[4.2]
|
2016-03-04 07:08:24 -05:00
|
|
|
disable_ddl_transaction!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def up
|
|
|
|
return unless Gitlab::Database.postgresql?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
execute 'CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY index_on_users_lower_username ON users (LOWER(username));'
|
|
|
|
execute 'CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY index_on_users_lower_email ON users (LOWER(email));'
|
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
def down
|
|
|
|
return unless Gitlab::Database.postgresql?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
remove_index :users, :index_on_users_lower_username
|
|
|
|
remove_index :users, :index_on_users_lower_email
|
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Plucking IDs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This can't be stressed enough: **never** use ActiveRecord's `pluck` to pluck a
|
|
|
|
set of values into memory only to use them as an argument for another query. For
|
|
|
|
example, this will make the database **very** sad:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
projects = Project.all.pluck(:id)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MergeRequest.where(source_project_id: projects)
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instead you can just use sub-queries which perform far better:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
MergeRequest.where(source_project_id: Project.all.select(:id))
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The _only_ time you should use `pluck` is when you actually need to operate on
|
|
|
|
the values in Ruby itself (e.g. write them to a file). In almost all other cases
|
|
|
|
you should ask yourself "Can I not just use a sub-query?".
|
|
|
|
|
2019-03-29 07:23:05 -04:00
|
|
|
In line with our `CodeReuse/ActiveRecord` cop, you should only use forms like
|
|
|
|
`pluck(:id)` or `pluck(:user_id)` within model code. In the former case, you can
|
|
|
|
use the `ApplicationRecord`-provided `.pluck_primary_key` helper method instead.
|
|
|
|
In the latter, you should add a small helper method to the relevant model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Inherit from ApplicationRecord
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most models in the GitLab codebase should inherit from `ApplicationRecord`,
|
|
|
|
rather than from `ActiveRecord::Base`. This allows helper methods to be easily
|
|
|
|
added.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An exception to this rule exists for models created in database migrations. As
|
|
|
|
these should be isolated from application code, they should continue to subclass
|
|
|
|
from `ActiveRecord::Base`.
|
|
|
|
|
2016-03-04 07:08:24 -05:00
|
|
|
## Use UNIONs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNIONs aren't very commonly used in most Rails applications but they're very
|
|
|
|
powerful and useful. In most applications queries tend to use a lot of JOINs to
|
|
|
|
get related data or data based on certain criteria, but JOIN performance can
|
|
|
|
quickly deteriorate as the data involved grows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, if you want to get a list of projects where the name contains a
|
|
|
|
value _or_ the name of the namespace contains a value most people would write
|
|
|
|
the following query:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM projects
|
|
|
|
JOIN namespaces ON namespaces.id = projects.namespace_id
|
|
|
|
WHERE projects.name ILIKE '%gitlab%'
|
|
|
|
OR namespaces.name ILIKE '%gitlab%';
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using a large database this query can easily take around 800 milliseconds to
|
|
|
|
run. Using a UNION we'd write the following instead:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT projects.*
|
|
|
|
FROM projects
|
|
|
|
WHERE projects.name ILIKE '%gitlab%'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SELECT projects.*
|
|
|
|
FROM projects
|
|
|
|
JOIN namespaces ON namespaces.id = projects.namespace_id
|
|
|
|
WHERE namespaces.name ILIKE '%gitlab%';
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This query in turn only takes around 15 milliseconds to complete while returning
|
|
|
|
the exact same records.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This doesn't mean you should start using UNIONs everywhere, but it's something
|
|
|
|
to keep in mind when using lots of JOINs in a query and filtering out records
|
|
|
|
based on the joined data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GitLab comes with a `Gitlab::SQL::Union` class that can be used to build a UNION
|
|
|
|
of multiple `ActiveRecord::Relation` objects. You can use this class as
|
|
|
|
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
union = Gitlab::SQL::Union.new([projects, more_projects, ...])
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project.from("(#{union.to_sql}) projects")
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Ordering by Creation Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When ordering records based on the time they were created you can simply order
|
|
|
|
by the `id` column instead of ordering by `created_at`. Because IDs are always
|
|
|
|
unique and incremented in the order that rows are created this will produce the
|
|
|
|
exact same results. This also means there's no need to add an index on
|
|
|
|
`created_at` to ensure consistent performance as `id` is already indexed by
|
|
|
|
default.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-10 11:53:20 -04:00
|
|
|
## Use WHERE EXISTS instead of WHERE IN
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While `WHERE IN` and `WHERE EXISTS` can be used to produce the same data it is
|
|
|
|
recommended to use `WHERE EXISTS` whenever possible. While in many cases
|
|
|
|
PostgreSQL can optimise `WHERE IN` quite well there are also many cases where
|
|
|
|
`WHERE EXISTS` will perform (much) better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Rails you have to use this by creating SQL fragments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```ruby
|
|
|
|
Project.where('EXISTS (?)', User.select(1).where('projects.creator_id = users.id AND users.foo = X'))
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This would then produce a query along the lines of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```sql
|
|
|
|
SELECT *
|
|
|
|
FROM projects
|
|
|
|
WHERE EXISTS (
|
|
|
|
SELECT 1
|
|
|
|
FROM users
|
|
|
|
WHERE projects.creator_id = users.id
|
|
|
|
AND users.foo = X
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
2016-03-04 07:08:24 -05:00
|
|
|
[gin-index]: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/gin.html
|
2018-07-16 10:19:22 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## `.find_or_create_by` is not atomic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The inherent pattern with methods like `.find_or_create_by` and
|
|
|
|
`.first_or_create` and others is that they are not atomic. This means,
|
|
|
|
it first runs a `SELECT`, and if there are no results an `INSERT` is
|
|
|
|
performed. With concurrent processes in mind, there is a race condition
|
|
|
|
which may lead to trying to insert two similar records. This may not be
|
|
|
|
desired, or may cause one of the queries to fail due to a constraint
|
|
|
|
violation, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using transactions does not solve this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-04 08:39:54 -05:00
|
|
|
To solve this we've added the `ApplicationRecord.safe_find_or_create_by`.
|
2018-07-16 10:19:22 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2019-02-04 08:39:54 -05:00
|
|
|
This method can be used just as you would the normal
|
|
|
|
`find_or_create_by` but it wraps the call in a *new* transaction and
|
|
|
|
retries if it were to fail because of an
|
|
|
|
`ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique` error.
|
2018-07-16 10:19:22 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2019-02-04 08:39:54 -05:00
|
|
|
To be able to use this method, make sure the model you want to use
|
|
|
|
this on inherits from `ApplicationRecord`.
|