数据库 
首页 > 数据库 > 浏览文章

MySQL存储时间类型选择的问题讲解

(编辑:jimmy 日期: 2024/9/24 浏览:3 次 )

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)可读性极差,无法直观的看到数据

TIMESTAMP

(1)4个字节储存

(2)值以UTC格式保存

(3)时区转化 ,存储时对当前的时区进行转换,检索时再转换回当前的时区。

(4)TIMESTAMP值不能早于1970或晚于2037

datetime

(1)8个字节储存

(2)与时区无关

(3)以'YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS'格式检索和显示DATETIME值。支持的范围为'1000-01-01 00:00:00'到'9999-12-31 23:59:59'

随着Mysql性能越来越来高,个人觉得关于时间的存储方式,具体怎么存储看个人习惯和项目需求吧

分享两篇关于int vs timestamp vs datetime性能测试的文章

Myisam:MySQL DATETIME vs TIMESTAMP vs INT 测试仪

CREATE TABLE `test_datetime` (
`id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`datetime` FIELDTYPE NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM;

机型配置

  • kip-locking
  • key_buffer = 128M
  • max_allowed_packet = 1M
  • table_cache = 512
  • sort_buffer_size = 2M
  • read_buffer_size = 2M
  • read_rnd_buffer_size = 8M
  • myisam_sort_buffer_size = 8M
  • thread_cache_size = 8
  • query_cache_type = 0
  • query_cache_size = 0
  • thread_concurrency = 4

测试

DATETIME   14111 14010        14369     130000000
TIMESTAMP  13888        13887        14122     90000000
INT        13270        12970        13496     90000000

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

以上就是这篇文章的全部内容了,希望本文的内容对大家的学习或者工作具有一定的参考学习价值,谢谢大家对的支持。如果你想了解更多相关内容请查看下面相关链接

上一篇:MYSQL本地安装以及出现的问题解决
下一篇:mysql 8.0.15 安装配置图文教程
一句话新闻
一文看懂荣耀MagicBook Pro 16
荣耀猎人回归!七大亮点看懂不只是轻薄本,更是游戏本的MagicBook Pro 16.
人们对于笔记本电脑有一个固有印象:要么轻薄但性能一般,要么性能强劲但笨重臃肿。然而,今年荣耀新推出的MagicBook Pro 16刷新了人们的认知——发布会上,荣耀宣布猎人游戏本正式回归,称其继承了荣耀 HUNTER 基因,并自信地为其打出“轻薄本,更是游戏本”的口号。
众所周知,寻求轻薄本的用户普遍更看重便携性、外观造型、静谧性和打字办公等用机体验,而寻求游戏本的用户则普遍更看重硬件配置、性能释放等硬核指标。把两个看似难以相干的产品融合到一起,我们不禁对它产生了强烈的好奇:作为代表荣耀猎人游戏本的跨界新物种,它究竟做了哪些平衡以兼顾不同人群的各类需求呢?
友情链接:杰晶网络 DDR爱好者之家 南强小屋 黑松山资源网 白云城资源网 SiteMap