前言
本篇文章讲解的主要内容是：从执行计划看NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 和 LEFT JOIN效率，还是那就话，别死记网上结论、在使用内外关联时，特别是简写方式时记住关联条件不要乱放！
【SQL开发实战技巧】这一系列博主当作复习旧知识来进行写作，毕竟SQL开发在数据分析场景非常重要且基础，面试也会经常问SQL开发和调优经验，相信当我写完这一系列文章，也能再有所收获，未来面对SQL面试也能游刃有余~。
一、从执行计划看NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 和 LEFT JOIN效率
有些单位的部门（如40)中一个员工也没有，只是设了一个部门名字，如下列语句：
select count(*) from dept where deptno=40;如何通过关联查询把这些信息查出来？
同样有三种写法:NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 和LEFT JOIN。
语句及PLAN如下（版本为11.2.0.4.0 )。
环境：
alter table dept add constraints pk_dept primary key (deptno); --如果你有就不用建了- NOT IN用法
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR select *
FROM dept
WHERE deptno NOT IN (SELECT emp.deptno FROM emp WHERE emp.deptno IS NOT NULL);
SELECT * FROM TABLE(dbms_xplan.display());
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1353548327
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Ti
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 1 | MERGE JOIN ANTI | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| DEPT | 4 | 80 | 2 (0)| 00
| 3 | INDEX FULL SCAN | PK_DEPT | 4 | | 1 (0)| 00
|* 4 | SORT UNIQUE | | 14 | 42 | 4 (25)| 00
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | EMP | 14 | 42 | 3 (0)| 00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
4 - access("DEPTNO"="EMP"."DEPTNO")
filter("DEPTNO"="EMP"."DEPTNO")
5 - filter("EMP"."DEPTNO" IS NOT NULL)
19 rows selected- NOT EXISTS 用法
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR SELECT*
FROM dept
WHERE NOT EXISTS ( SELECT NULL FROM emp WHERE emp.deptno = dept.deptno) ;
SELECT * FROM TABLE(dbms_xplan.display());
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1353548327
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Ti
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 1 | MERGE JOIN ANTI | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| DEPT | 4 | 80 | 2 (0)| 00
| 3 | INDEX FULL SCAN | PK_DEPT | 4 | | 1 (0)| 00
|* 4 | SORT UNIQUE | | 14 | 42 | 4 (25)| 00
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | EMP | 14 | 42 | 3 (0)| 00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
4 - access("EMP"."DEPTNO"="DEPT"."DEPTNO")
filter("EMP"."DEPTNO"="DEPT"."DEPTNO")
5 - filter("EMP"."DEPTNO" IS NOT NULL)
19 rows selected- LEFT JOIN 用法
根据前面介绍过的左联知识,LEFT JOIN 取出的是左表中所有的数据,其中与右表不匹配的就表示左表NOT IN右表。
所以这里LEFT JOIN加上条件TS NULL,就是LEFT JOIN的写法：
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
SELECT dept.*
FROM dept
LEFT JOIN emp ON emp.deptno = dept.deptno WHERE emp.deptno IS NULL;
SELECT * FROM TABLE(dbms_xplan.display());
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1353548327
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Ti
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 1 | MERGE JOIN ANTI | | 1 | 23 | 6 (17)| 00
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| DEPT | 4 | 80 | 2 (0)| 00
| 3 | INDEX FULL SCAN | PK_DEPT | 4 | | 1 (0)| 00
|* 4 | SORT UNIQUE | | 14 | 42 | 4 (25)| 00
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | EMP | 14 | 42 | 3 (0)| 00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
4 - access("EMP"."DEPTNO"="DEPT"."DEPTNO")
filter("EMP"."DEPTNO"="DEPT"."DEPTNO")
5 - filter("EMP"."DEPTNO" IS NOT NULL)
19 rows selected通过看上面的执行计划，三个SQL用的都是 MERGE JOIN ANTI, 说明这三种方法的效率一样。
如果想改写，就要对比改写前后的PLAN,根据PLAN来判断并测试哪种方法的效率高，一定要记住不能凭借某些结论来碰运气。
二、外连接中的条件不要乱放，建议大家使用join而非(+)
对于系列三博客介绍的左联语句,见下面的数据。
SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str,r.status FROM l
LEFT JOIN r ON l.v = r.v
ORDER BY 1 , 2 ;
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_1
left_2
left_3 right_3 1
left_4 right_4 0那现在有这么一个需求：对于其中的L表，四条数据都返回。而对于R表，我们需要只显示其中的status=1的数据，也就是下面这样的结果：
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_1
left_2
left_3 right_3 1
left_4 对于这个需求，可能有些人会加一个where条件！然后结果就变成了下面这样了:
left join写法：
SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str,r.status
FROM l
LEFT JOIN r ON (l.v = r.v)
where r.status=1
ORDER BY 1 , 2;
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_3 right_3 1（+）写法：
SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str, r.status
FROM l, r
where l.v = r.v(+)
and r.status = 1
ORDER BY 1, 2;
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_3 right_3 1而此时的执行计划：
SQL> EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
2 SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str,r.status
3 FROM l
4 LEFT JOIN r ON (l.v = r.v)
5 where r.status=1
6 ORDER BY 1 , 2;
Explained
SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(dbms_xplan.display());
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 688663707
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2 | 42 | 7 (15)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 2 | 42 | 7 (15)| 00:00:01 |
|* 2 | HASH JOIN | | 2 | 42 | 6 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| R | 2 | 24 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 4 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| L | 4 | 36 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
2 - access("L"."V"="R"."V")
3 - filter("R"."STATUS"=1)
17 rows selected很明显，结果以及执行计划(HASH JOIN)与我们期望得到的结果都不一致！！！这是很多人在写查询或更改查询时常遇到的一种错误。问题就在于所加条件的位置及写法，正确的写法分别如下：
SQL> SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str, r.status
2 FROM l
3 LEFT JOIN r
4 ON (l.v = r.v and r.status = 1)
5 ORDER BY 1, 2;
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_1
left_2
left_3 right_3 1
left_4
SQL> SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str, r.status
2 FROM l, r
3 where l.v = r.v(+)
4 and r.status(+) = 1
5 ORDER BY 1, 2;
LEFT_STR RIGHT_STR STATUS
-------- --------- ----------
left_1
left_2
left_3 right_3 1
left_4 看一下这时候的执行计划：
SQL> EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
2 SELECT l.str AS left_str, r.str AS right_str, r.status
3 FROM l
4 LEFT JOIN r
5 ON (l.v = r.v and r.status = 1)
6 ORDER BY 1, 2;
Explained
SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(dbms_xplan.display());
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2310059642
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4 | 84 | 7 (15)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 4 | 84 | 7 (15)| 00:00:01 |
|* 2 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 4 | 84 | 6 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| L | 4 | 36 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 4 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| R | 2 | 24 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
2 - access("L"."V"="R"."V"(+))
4 - filter("R"."STATUS"(+)=1)
17 rows selected以上两种写法结果均正确，且根据执行计划HASH JOIN OUTER明确走的是外连接。而且根据上面查询我们能够看出来JOIN的方式明显更容易辨别，这也是我反复建议使用JOIN的原因。
对于上面SQL我们还可以使用先过滤再关联的方式，即R表先过滤：
(select * from r where status=1) r总结
同上一篇博客所说，在使用in exists或则NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 和 LEFT JOIN时候，不要想当然的认为in和not in效率极其低下，在本章案例中通过执行计划能够直观的看到，三者效率竟然一致了！！所以，读万卷书不如行万里路，网上别人做的总结再好，也不如自己实践一把来的真实。还有就是，在使用关联查询时候，关联条件和过滤条件一定要想好放哪里，不然你会想当然的错了！
