Slashdot Mirror


MySQL Database Design and Optimization

norburym (Mary Norbury-Glaser) writes "As the title suggests, Beginning MySQL Database Design and Optimization is intended for the range of users between novice and professional. It may seem difficult for one book to suit such a wide readership without losing readers on either end of the spectrum, or perhaps without providing adequate coverage to any particular audience, Apress has done what many other publishers have failed to do by providing an excellent series of 'novice to professional' books. An example of their dedication to detail and perfection is the inclusion of top-notch technical reviewers (Mike Hillyer, in this case, often found haunting Experts Exchange as one of the top MySQL experts) who provide expertise to the series. Authors Jon Stephens and Chad Russell have extensive combined PHP and MySQL experience that shows in the content of this volume. Readers with some MySQL experience who desire a broader range of instruction will gain much from this book. Experienced users will find quite a lot of valuable information that will extend their existing knowledge base. Concepts in design are better learned from the beginning to avoid repeating poor programming mistakes, but it's never too late to learn good practices." Read on for the rest of Norbury-Glaser's review. Beginning MySQL Database Design and Optimization author Jon Stephens and Chad Russell (Technical Reviewer: Mike Hillyer) pages 520 publisher Apress rating 8 reviewer Mary Norbury-Glaser ISBN 1590593324 summary MySQL Database Design and Optimization

This book focuses on MySQL 4.0/4.1 but also gives consideration to v.3.23 users as well as a nod toward v.5. The layout of each chapter gives a description of the topic of the chapter, followed by the meat of the chapter, a summary and what's next (how the context of this chapter ties into the subject of the next). There are numerous "notes", cautionary flags, tips, screen shots, code examples as well as thoughts from each author that provide explanatory asides to the content. The authors also provide references to other volumes, as needed.

A glance through the table of contents will give the reader a precise overview of what to expect in this book: Review of MySQL Basics; MySQL Column and Table Types; Keys, Indexes and Normalization; Optimizing Queries With Operators, Branching and Functions; Joins, Temporary Tables and Transactions; Finding the Bottlenecks, MySQL Programming; and Looking Ahead.

Chapter 1: Review of MySQL Basics gives a very quick (under 50 pages) summary of how to connect to the MySQL server; MySQL's identifiers and naming conventions for databases, tables and columns; a review of MySQL's syntax, writing basic queries and using basic commands (create, drop, select, insert, update, delete); and a discussion of the use of table, column and expression aliases. This section, while adequate, is clearly intended as an analysis of core information necessary to proceed to further chapters.

Chapter 2 follows with MySQL Column and Table Types, which deal with datatypes and structures used to store the data. The goal here is to help the reader design effective tables (and therefore create a well-designed and efficient database) suited to the particular type of data at hand. Numeric types are covered in depth; strings, the null value, ENUM and SET are also addressed as well as common "gotchas" and developer errors.

Keys, Indexes and Normalization come naturally in Chapter 3, with optimal data handling the goal: the chapter addresses getting data in efficiently and getting the results out efficiently, eliminating redundant data, appropriate uses of indexes and common index creation errors.

The core of the book is clearly Chapter 4, "Optimizing Queries with Operators, Branching, and Functions." Here, optimization skills are honed; manipulation and filtering of data is one of MySQL's strengths and this chapter shows the reader how to replace less-than-ideal program logic with SQL constructs to precisely adjust query performance. There's a good demonstration here of outputting a list of member data to a web page. The ultimate goal in this chapter is to provide the reader good skills that translate into better efficiency and faster database interaction. As the authors point out, one obvious logical consequence of this is easier migration between platforms and programming languages.

The next reasonable step is to look at additional features that MySQL has up its sleeve that will save the developer time and effort in the overall scheme of application development. Chapter 5, "Joins, Temporary Tables, and Transactions" discusses three of these additional features. The authors carefully point out that each of these eliminate excess queries needed to pull data, decrease code overhead, minimize the need to store data as application logic, decrease the number of bugs that appear in code and help guarantee data integrity (an aspect of database design that unfortunately often takes a back seat to other priorities as developers are often not concerned with the validity of data in a real world sense; i.e. from the user's perspective).

Chapter 6, "Finding the Bottlenecks," addresses modifying system configuration variables outside of the default and how these can dramatically affect performance. The authors look at some available free tools that help monitor server performance and enable configuration changes including mytop, WinMySqlAdmin, phpMyAdmin and the new MySQL Administrator (available from MySQL AB). MySQL caching capabilities and the ability to decrease repetitious read/writes to disk (good table, key and query caching within MySQL) are discussed. Finally, database interoperability and abstraction layers are mentioned in terms of performance penalties vs. making life easier for the programmer.

MySQL Programming is the topic of Chapter 7, where a very good discussion of the MySQL API is provided. There are a lot of useful examples in this chapter covering many of the common MySQL APIs available (PHP's MySQL and MySQLi, Pythons's MySQLdb, ODBC, Perl's DBI), along with feature discussions and examples.

The final chapter, "Looking Ahead," examines MySQL v.4.1, 5.0 and 5.1 and some eagerly awaited new features, including stored procedures, stored functions, views and triggers.

This is a well-rounded volume on MySQL design. There are excellent examples and the flow of the text is conversational without being rambling and unstructured. The authors have obviously taken great pains to minimize tangents and extraneous information; pithy, but with sufficient detail in mind. The reader is left with neither the sense of being overwhelmed nor longing for an explanation for a glossed-over topic. This book is pretty much a "must have" for a MySQL programmer looking to bridge the gap between novice and professional.

You can purchase Beginning MySQL Database Design and Optimization from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

15 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Re:MySQL sucks by temojen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    3) It's probably already available at your hosting provider, whereas Postgresql probably isn't (vicious cycle with #1)

  2. Re:MySQL sucks by dfetter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MySQL is not easy. Need a subquery? You're out of luck, pal. A FULL JOIN? Sorry. Check constraints? No dice. Throw an error instead of taking a bad guess when you've fatfingered an input? Oops. And God help you if you need some trigger logic for auditing purposes, because MySQL AB certainly won't.

    --
    What part of "A well regulated militia" do you not understand?
  3. Re:MySQL sucks by ptlis · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Here's an old adage for you: Every tool has a job, and there's a job for every tool.

    mySQL may not be appropriate in a mission-critical situation, but that does not make it bad for all situations; if you need speed in prescedence of everything else then mySQL is probably the right tool for the job. If you need data integrity, ACID compliance etc then PostgrSQL, Oracle etc are the right tool for the job.

    Outright saying one or the other is a POS only makes you look stupud.

    --
    There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.
  4. Re:MySQL sucks by Michalson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Then why not use PostgreSQL? For companies it's cheaper (MySQL licence for commercial use is almost as much as the basic Windows 2003 Server Licence), and for open source lovers it's even more free.

    And that of course ignores the fact that it's also technically superior - faster, proper data integrity, and real SQL (sorry, but for an SQL programmer, the kiddie pool syntax available in MySQL is The show stopper)

    MySQL is the very thing open source is supposed to be against - software being used just because everyone else is using it, without regard for if it actually has any merit. MySQL is the Windows of the database world.

  5. Re:common gotchas by ajs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is NOT a list of "common gotchas" (the misleading name of the page aside), it's an anti-MySQL rant that has lived on far too long.

    Please, can we for once have a post about a piece of software on Slashdot without the pro-X or anti-Y folks flocking to it to bash or praise it? Can we just for once talk about the damn book?

  6. Another MySQL book review? by smclean · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Oy, here come the SQL flamewars.

    Seriously, is there any other reason for these MySQL book reviews? They all sound the same, and who buys books on MySQL optimization anyway? The manual and 'EXPLAIN' should be enough for anyway.

    Enough ranting, continue your too-highly-moderated offtopic flamewars.

    --

    "'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."

  7. uhhh, what? by RelliK · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is this a rant? Are you saying the problems they list don't exist?

    I like that site cause it contains no spin: it just lists the facts and provides references to the documentation. Is it the facts that bother you?

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:uhhh, what? by ajs · · Score: 1, Insightful

      FWIW, I've used both PostgreSQL and MySQL.

      This is a bit like disclaiming your political views by saying you've voted constitution party AND green party.

      A lot of folks think that MySQL is a good idea

      It's software that does what you tell it to do. Thus, it is a good idea. You think software product X is beter, meets some criteria that you find compelling, can do things that you want... great, that's fine, but like I said, that opinion doesn't need to be spattered all over every occurance of software product Y on slashdot.

    2. Re:uhhh, what? by kpharmer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > It's software that does what you tell it to do.

      Actually, no.

      The point of the many of the 'gotchas' is that this software behaves erractically: rather than produce an exception during an overflow or conversion error, for example, it just silently modifies the data and returns no warning to the user.

      The truly bizarre thing about this set of errors is that it is about the only database management software you'll find that is so guilty of this behavior. You'd never accept that behavior from SQL Server, Oracle, DB2, Informix, Sybase, etc - so why accept it from MySQL? Does it get some kind of 'get out of jail free' card regarding product quality just because it's open source?

      Two years ago the folks from MySQL stated that transactions, views, subselects, etc weren't needed by 99% of the applications out there. That was pure misinformation. And a lot of people called them on it. Now they're getting around to fixing those feature dificiencies in the product. And it's a better product because of it.

      Once they get around to fixing all the silent errors and other quality control problems in the product - it'll be a better product for that reason as well.

      Anyhow - please don't blame us victims. If you don't want to hear about rediculous problems with the product - help get the vendor to fix them. There's really no excuse after all.

    3. Re:uhhh, what? by kpharmer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > A well documented convinience for applications
      > which always behaves the same way.

      Pardon? So when MySQL fails to report of an exception (incorrect date, string overflow, etc, etc, etc) - that's intentional? It wasn't sloppiness or incompetence? So, should the other database vendors start eliminating exception handling as well - perhaps in the interest of keeping the product easy to use?

      On the other hand, maybe you need to get a little emotional distance from the product.

      > Please explain your definition of erratic for me, because mine doesn't seem to match the example you
      > give.

      How's this: sometimes mysql statements will produce exceptions consistent with every other major dbms product. And sometimes they won't. There's no discernable patten here. You might just need to:
      1. perform *enormous* amounts of testing on your application to determine if database services things you should be able to take for granted really work.
      2. read the gotchas page and review your code closely. Then test the hell out of it as well.

      Of course, testing is always valuable. But putting an extra month of testing into an application just because the database lack reasonable exception handling is hardly expected in 2004 - or economical.

      > Wrong. Simply wrong. What they said is that their PAYING CUSTOMERS prioritize their work, and
      > while having everything would be nice, they have to do things in the order that puts the bread on
      > the table.

      No, I've specifically read interviews with MySQL AB leaders in which they stated that 99% of the applications out there didn't need transactions. Might have been on slashdot, will check later.

      > For something like sub-selects, vies, and other goodies, I'd much rather have all of the features
      > of 4.0 and 4.1 before those.

      Sure, given the list of missing features that they had two years ago, it could be difficult to prioritize. But keep in mind that these relational database features have always been provided in the v1.0 release of every other dbms product out there. DB2 & Oracle supported them *more than 20 years ago*.

      An appropriate response from MySQL would be: we'll implement as soon as possible, or we see ourselves as a very simple database. The inappropriate response was: hey, all you new developers - you don't need that stuff anyway. Transactions? Only banking applications need that junk. That was unresponsible misinformation.

  8. Re:article NOT A RANT, those are legitimate gotcha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Okay, why?

    In the database world, there is a solid, underlying foundation: relational theory. This was developed, what, 30 years ago? It has *provable* characteristics.

    So when you want a database, pick the one that has the most of those characteristics. Unfortunately, most folks seem to think it's Emacs vs. vi. Just pick the one that "feels" better, or that they learned first. That's fine for text editors, but not, say, for the foundation of a mission-critical finance system.

  9. Re:MySQL sucks by jarich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I assume you only code in assembler?

  10. Database design? by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Database design should be a generic RDBMS book for the most part. It does not make much sense to repeat table design techniques and philosophy for each RDBMS product. (However, giving vendor-specific tips and limits is understandable.) It might be cheaper to purchase and write a generic book about table design because it can be written and printed for multiple products. Then again, many publishers simply copy-and-paste semi-generic topics with slight custom tuning.

    1. Re:Database design? by ahmusch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A database that is perfectly "well-factored", lacking in redundancy and providing complete consistency -- but runs like a dead pig in molasses is not a well-designed database, because it does not meet the often implicit requirement to perform at a given throughput.

      I say that if you do database design without considering the performance impacts, you're not doing database design in the real world. At that point, it's an academic problem. If you're attempting to solve an actual problem or build an actual system, you must consider the performance nature and limitations of the database every bit as much as a civil or structural engineer must understand the difference between suspension and piling bridges.

      The very fact that you refer to domains means you're somewhat familiar with logical modeling, but the difference between logical modeling and physical modeling is significantly greater than switching the view in ERwin. Hell, the flexibility toward future needs is an implementation specific issue, because with some RDBMS's you can add, remove, and change columns under some circumstances, and in others you cannot.

      Regrettably, academia does not focus on these differences, so we tend to get perfectly elegant designs -- that don't work, and it's all the DB designer's fault. Better tools that take into account the questions I raised to make design more interactive may help, but often those questions aren't and can't be addressed before a system runs into customers.

      Codd's terse, but the theory is complete. It's written in an academic style with the assumption of a great many fundamentals.

  11. Still needs lots of work by gtoomey · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'm using 4.1 (its not a production release yet) which has subqueries, proper joins, and unions. Its the first version which is even remotely acceptable. Coding without subqueries is very frustrating

    Views, synonyms and referential integrity (foreign key constraints) would be very nice too.

    When I find out why VHS became more popular than technically superior Betamax, I'll figure out why Mysql is more popular than Postgres.