If I have a collection which I query based on fields _id and CreationTimestamp.O as below:
var _query = Query.And(
Query.EQ("_id", "TheId"),
Query.GT("CreationTimestamp.0", DateTimeOffset.UtcNow.AddMinutes(-15).UtcTicks));
Should I create a compound index on both these fields?
I know _id by default has an index.
I am looking for guidance on best practice i.e. Create a compound index for both fields or just create an index for CreationTimestamp.O as their is already an index on _id
There's not much benefit in creating compound index here. Since the selectivity of autocreated index on _id field is 1 (it's unique index) there's no reason in having any compound index prefixed with it. The only possible benefit may be the fact MongoDB can use covered index for this query and possibly speedup the things (you need to benchmark on your data to prove this).
Related
I have two fields scheduledStamp and email in a mongodb collection called inventory.
Having the following jpa query:
fun findAllByScheduledStampAfterAndEmailEquals(scheduledStamp:Long,email:String):List<Inventory>
What is the best way to index this collection?
I want to have less indexes as possible, avoiding unnecessary indexes.
Knowing that:
This collection can have more than million entries (index is needed)
Querying by:
db.inventory.find({ scheduledStamp: {$gt:1594048295294}})
for sure results few entries
Querying by:
db.inventory.find({ email: "abc#gmail.com"})
for sure results few entries
If you need to support query only on email : Indexing email is must
If you need to support query only on scheduledStamp: Indexing scheduledStamp is must
If you want of query on both, a third index is required. But you can create a compound index to cover this query and one of the above queries.
Since Mongo follows prefix match for selecting index:
You may have index on {"email":1} and {"scheduledStamp:1","email":1}
OR
You may have index on {"scheduledStamp":1} and {"email:1","scheduledStamp":1}
But since you said these fields return few documents:
Just having 2 indexes on {"email":1} and {"scheduledStamp":1} may perform good if not optimum.
I have a collection which has an optional field xy_id. About 10% of the documents (out of 500k) does not have this xy_id field.
I have quite a lot of queries to this collection like find({xy_id: <id>}).
I tried indexing it normally (.createIndex({xy_id: 1}, {"background": true})) and it does improve the query speed.
Is this the correct way to index the field in this case? or should I be using a sparse index or another way?
Yes, this is the correct way. The default behaviour of MongoDB is serving well in this case. You can see in the docs that index creation supports an unique flag, which is false by default. All your documents missing the index key will be indexed under a single index entry. Queries can use this index in all cases because all the documents are indexed.
On the other hand, if you use sparse index the documents missing the index key will not be indexed at all. Some operations such as count, sort and other queries will not be able to use the sparse index unless explicitly hinted to do so. If explicitly hinted, you should be okay with incorrect results - the entries not in the index will be omitted in the result. You can read about it here.
How costly is it to index some fields in MongoDB,
I have a table where i want uniqueness combining two fields, Every where i search they suggested compound index with unique set to true. But what i was doing is " Appending both field1_field2 and making it a key, so that field2 will be always unique for field1.(and add Application logic) As i thought indexing is costly.
And also as MongoDB documentation advices us not to use Custom Object ID like auto incrementing number, I end up giving big numbers to Models like Classes, Students etc, (where i could have used easily used 1,2,3 in sql lite), I didn't think to add a new field for numbering and index that field for querying.
What are the best practices advice for production
The advantage of using compound indexes vs your own indexed field system is that compound indexes allows sorting quicker than regular indexed fields. It also lowers the size of every documents.
In your case, if you want to get the documents sorted with values in field1 ascending and in field2 descending, it is better to use a compound index. If you only want to get the documents that have some specific value contained in field1_field2, it does not really matter if you use compound indexes or a regular indexed field.
However, if you already have field1 and field2 in seperate fields in the documents, and you also have a field containing field1_field2, it could be better to use a compound index on field1 and field2, and simply delete the field containing field1_field2. This could lower the size of every document and ultimately reduce the size of your database.
Regarding the cost of the indexing, you almost have to index field1_field2 if you want to go down that route anyways. Queries based on unindexed fields in MongoDB are really slow. And it does not take much more time adding a document to a database when the document has an indexed field (we're talking 1 millisecond or so). Note that adding an index on many existing documents can take a few minutes. This is why you usually plan the indexing strategy before adding any documents.
TL;DR:
If you have limited disk space or need to sort the results, go with a compound index and delete field1_field2. Otherwise, use field1_field2, but it has to be indexed!
For example: If I had a db collection called Stores, and each store document has a list of the items they sell, and stores generally share items, then how would mongodb build an index on that?
Would it build a btree index on all possible items and then on each leaf of that tree (each item) will reference the documents which contain it?
Background:
I'm trying to perform queries like this using an index:
db.store.find({merchandise:{$exists:true}}) // where 'merchandise' is a list
db.store.find()[merchandise].count()
would an index on 'merchandise' help me?
If not, is my only option creating a separate meta field on 'merchandise' size, and index that?
Schema:
{ _id: 123456,
name: Macys
merchandise: [ 248651234564, 54862101248, 12450184, 1256001456 ]
}
From your document sample if you build your index on merchandise it will be multikey index and that index will be on every item on the array. See Multikey Indexes section in here.
If merchandise is an array of subdocuments, indexing over merchandise will put the index on all field of subdocument in the array. With index you can make queries like
db.store.find("merchandise":248651234564) and it will retrieve all document having merchandise 248651234564
For getting count of merchandise, you can get only get the size of merchandise field of one document like db.store.find()[index].merchandise.length. So creating a seperate field on merchandise size and indexing is a feasible option, if you want to run queries based on merchandise size.
Hope this helps
If you index a field that contains an array, MongoDB indexes each value in the array separately, in a multikey index. When you have 4 documents inside an array, each will act as a key in the index and point to the mentioned document(s).
You can use multikey indexes to index fields within objects embedded in arrays. That means, in your array, you can index a specific field in each document. For example: stuffs.thing : 1.
Read more about Multikey Indexes
Whether you need these indexes would depend on:
How many queries rely on that specific field?
How many updates, inserts hit that specific field (array)?
How many items will that array contain?
...
Remember that indexes slow writes as they need to be updated as well. I'd consider an explain on my queries to measure performance.
I am building a webapp using Codeigniter (PHP) and MongoDB.
I am creating indexes and have one question.
If I am querying on three fields (_id, status, type) and want to
create an index do I need to include _id when ensuring the index like this:
db.comments.ensureIndex({_id: 1, status : 1, type : 1});
or will this due?
db.comments.ensureIndex({status : 1, type : 1});
You would need to explicitly include _id in your ensureIndex call if you wanted to include it in your compound index. But because filtering by _id already provides selectivity of a single document that's very rarely the right thing to do. I think it would only make sense if your documents are very large and you're trying to use covered indexes.
MongoDB will currently only use one index per query with the exception of $or queries. If your common query will always be searching on those three fields (_id, status, type) then a compound index would be helpful.
From within the DB shell you can use the explain() command on your query to get information on the indexes used.
You don't need to implicitly create index on the _id field, it's done automatically. See the mongo documentation:
The _id Index
For all collections except capped collections, an index is automatically created for the _id field. This index is special and cannot be deleted. The _id index enforces uniqueness for its keys (except for some situations with sharding).