I have a data structure that is basically a document with a dictionary of tags. I am attempting to bring back all documents of a given formtype that have a tag named 'Last Name' and a tag value of 'Smith'. There may be 0..N 'Last Name' tags associated with the document.
I am using the following linq query to try to match a source document to children with matching tags:
DB.Documents
.Where(doc => doc.FormID == pd.IndexForm.FormID)
.Where(doc => doc.Document_StringIndex_ReadOnly
.Join(Fields,
dsi => new { FieldName = dsi.FieldName, FieldValue = dsi.StringValue },
dsi2 => new { FieldName = dsi2.FieldName, FieldValue = dsi2.StringValue },
(dsi, dsi2) => dsi.Document).Count() > 0);
Which generates the following query when output using .ToTraceString()
SELECT
[Project1].*
FROM ( SELECT
[Extent1].*
(SELECT
COUNT(cast(1 as bit)) AS [A1]
FROM [dbo].[Document_StringIndex_ReadOnly] AS [Extent2]
INNER JOIN (SELECT [Extent3].*
FROM [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent3]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[Document_StringIndex_ReadOnly] AS [Extent4] ON [Extent3].[DocumentID] = [Extent4].[DocumentID] ) AS [Join1] ON (([Extent2].[FieldName] = [Join1].[FieldName]) OR (([Extent2].[FieldName] IS NULL) AND ([Join1].[FieldName] IS NULL))) AND (([Extent2].[StringValue] = [Join1].[StringValue]) OR (([Extent2].[StringValue] IS NULL) AND ([Join1].[StringValue] IS NULL)))
LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent5] ON [Extent2].[DocumentID] = [Extent5].[DocumentID]
WHERE ([Extent1].[DocumentID] = [Extent2].[DocumentID]) AND ([Join1].[DocumentID1] = #p__linq__7) AND ([Join1].[FieldName] = #p__linq__8)) AS [C1]
FROM [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[FormID] = #p__linq__5
) AS [Project1]
WHERE [Project1].[C1] > 0
If I do a direct substitution of constants for my parameters (as shown below) the query executes very quickly. However, if I leave the parameters in place the query takes several minutes.
SELECT
[Project1].*
FROM ( SELECT
[Extent1].*
(SELECT
COUNT(cast(1 as bit)) AS [A1]
FROM [dbo].[Document_StringIndex_ReadOnly] AS [Extent2]
INNER JOIN (SELECT [Extent3].*
FROM [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent3]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[Document_StringIndex_ReadOnly] AS [Extent4] ON [Extent3].[DocumentID] = [Extent4].[DocumentID] ) AS [Join1] ON (([Extent2].[FieldName] = [Join1].[FieldName]) OR (([Extent2].[FieldName] IS NULL) AND ([Join1].[FieldName] IS NULL))) AND (([Extent2].[StringValue] = [Join1].[StringValue]) OR (([Extent2].[StringValue] IS NULL) AND ([Join1].[StringValue] IS NULL)))
LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent5] ON [Extent2].[DocumentID] = [Extent5].[DocumentID]
WHERE ([Extent1].[DocumentID] = [Extent2].[DocumentID]) AND ([Join1].[DocumentID1] = 1015) AND ([Join1].[FieldName] = 'DDKey')) AS [C1]
FROM [dbo].[Document] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[FormID] = 22
) AS [Project1]
WHERE [Project1].[C1] > 0
After generating an execution plan, I learned that if I directly substitute the parameter values, SQL Server performs an index seek, and my query is fast. As soon as I leave the parameters in place, SQL Server will perform an index scan, and my query times out. Is there any way to prod SQL server to always seek? Can I force entity framework to not use parameterized queries?
In the generated SQL, this line
[Join1].[FieldName] = #p__linq__8
may be the problem.
If FieldName is varchar(...) and #p__linq__8 is nvarchar(...) then this clause will cause a table scan since the parameter type doesn't match the index type.
When you directly substitute 'DDKey' then the types match so you get an index seek. Try your query with N'DDkey' and see if you get a table scan.
This is an issue with various versions of Linq to Sql and Linq to Entities, but may be fixed in later releases.
One way to work around the problem if you can't update to the latest version would be to change FieldName to be nvarchar(...).
Related
I wrote the below query to pull the data from different databases. I have created two temp tables to pull the data from two different databases and finally a select statement from the original database to join all the tables. My query is getting executed but not getting any data.(Report is blank). I tried executing the two temp tables separately. it is giving the correct data. But when I execute the whole query, the result is blank. Below is the query. Please help.
"set fmtonly off
use GODSDB
IF object_id('tempdb..#CISIS_Call_Log') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE #CISIS_Call_Log
select *
into #CISIS_Call_Log
from OPENQUERY (CSISDB,
'select
ccl.ContractOID,
ccl.db_insertdate,
ccl.ContractCallLogStatusIdentifier,
ccl.db_UpdateDate,
ccp.ContractCallLogPurposeOID,
ccp.ContractCallLogPurposeIdentifier,
ccp.Description
from csisdb.dbo.ContractCallLog CCL
inner join csisdb.dbo.ContractCallLogPurpose CCP on ccl.ContractCallLogPurposeIdentifier = ccp.ContractCallLogPurposeIdentifier
where JurisdictionShortIdentifier = ''ON''
AND ContractCallLogStatusIdentifier IN (''DNR'', ''NR'')
')
IF object_id('tempdb..#CMS_Campaign') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE #CMS_Campaign
select *
into #CMS_Campaign
from OPENQUERY (BA_GBASSTOCMS, '
Select
SystemSourceIdentifier,
ContractOID,
OfferSentDate,
CampaignOfferTypeIdentifier,
CampaignContractStatusIdentifier,
CampaignContractStatusUpdateDate,
DeclineDate,
CampaignOfferOID,
CampaignOID,
CampaignStartDate,
CampaignEndDate,
Jurisdiction,
CampaignDescription
from CMS.dbo.vw_CampaignInfo
where Jurisdiction = ''ON''
and CampaignOfferTypeIdentifier = ''REN''
')
select mp.CommodityTypeIdentifier as Commodity
,c.RtlrContractIdentifier as ContractID
,cs.ContractStatusIdentifier as ContractStatus
,c.SigningDate
,cf.StartDate as FlowStartDate
,cf.EndDate as FlowEndDate
,datediff(day, getdate(), c.RenewalDate) as RemainingDays
,c.RenewalDate
,l.ContractCallLogStatusIdentifier as CallLogType
,Substring (l.Description, 1, 20) as CallPurpose
,l.db_insertDate as CallLogDate
,cms.CampaignOfferOID as OfferID
,cms.CampaignContractStatusIdentifier as OfferStatus
,cms.CampaignContractStatusUpdateDate as StatusChangeDate
,cms.DeclineDate
from Contract c
inner join contractstate cs on cs.contractoid = c.ContractOID
and cs.ContractStatusIdentifier in ('ERA', 'FLW')
and datediff(day, getdate(), c.RenewalDate) > 60
inner join SiteIdentification si on si.SiteOID = c.SiteOID
inner join MarketParticipant mp on mp.MarketParticipantOID = si.MarketParticipantOID
inner join Market m on m.MarketOID = mp.MarketOID
inner join Jurisdiction j on j.JurisdictionOID = m.JurisdictionOID
and j.CountryCode = 'CA'
and j.ProvinceOrStateCode = 'ON'
inner join ContractFlow cf on cf.ContractOID = c.ContractOID
inner join #CISIS_Call_Log l on convert(varchar(15), l.ContractOID) = c.RtlrContractIdentifier
inner join #CMS_Campaign cms on convert(varchar(15), cms.ContractOID) = c.RtlrContractIdentifier
set fmtonly on"
IF the data in each temp table is verified, then:
Try a smaller, less complex, query to test your temp tables with. Also try them using a LEFT join as well e.g.:
select
c.RtlrContractIdentifier as ContractID
, c.SigningDate
, datediff(day, getdate(), c.RenewalDate) as RemainingDays
, c.RenewalDate
, l.ContractCallLogStatusIdentifier as CallLogType
, Substring (l.Description, 1, 20) as CallPurpose
, l.db_insertDate as CallLogDate
, cms.CampaignOfferOID as OfferID
, cms.CampaignContractStatusIdentifier as OfferStatus
, cms.CampaignContractStatusUpdateDate as StatusChangeDate
, cms.DeclineDate
from Contract c
LEFT join #CISIS_Call_Log l on convert(varchar(15), l.ContractOID) = c.RtlrContractIdentifier
LEFT join #CMS_Campaign cms on convert(varchar(15), cms.ContractOID) = c.RtlrContractIdentifier
Does this return data? Does it return data from both joined tables?
If neither temp table is returning data then those join conditions need to be changed.
If both temp tables do return data from that query, then try INNER joins. If that still works, then add back more joins (one at a time) until you identify the join that causes the overall fault.
Without data for every table it just isn't possible for us to pinpoint the exact reason for a NULL result. Only you can, so you need to trouble-shoot the problem one step at a time.
UPDATE: There is a request about this on the EF Team's UserVoice site. Vote it up
This thread about the Include statement is also related.
Why it's important
Querying with EF6 and Linq rocks! But if it involves a couple of Join Tables, and a nullable Foreign Key, it bogs down with 1000 lines of T-Sql.
If Inner Joins could be forced, it would perform with only 10 lines
For example, an EF6 project references a SQL database. There's a Student table and a Tutor table. Not every Student has a Tutor, so Student.TutorId can be null.
All Student-Tutor info is easily found with T-SQL:
SELECT s.Name, t.Name FROM Student s JOIN Tutor t ON s.TutorId = t.Id
The Linq is like so:
var result = context.Students
.Where(s => s.TutorId != null)
.Select(s => new { StudentName = s.Name, TutorName = s.Tutor.Name })
.ToList();
But EF6 generates this SQL:
SELECT [Extent1].[Name],
CASE WHEN ([Extent2].[FirstName] IS NULL)
THEN N''
ELSE
[Extent2].[Name]
END AS [C1]
FROM [dbo].[Student] AS [Extent1]
LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Tutor] AS [Extent2] ON [Extent1].[TutorId] = [Extent2].[Id]
WHERE [Extent1].[TutorId] IS NOT NULL
Thanks to Peter for asking about this many years ago. Hopefully there is a better answer now than to abandon Linq.
This GitHub Repository has source code for experimentation.
Entity Framework will generate an inner join if you add a not-null condition after the projection:
var result = context.Students
.Select(s => new { StudentName = s.Name, TutorName = s.Tutor.Name })
.Where(x => x.TutorName != null)
.ToList();
I don't know why it works this way. If EF is smart enough to infer that x.TutorName != null amounts to an inner join, I'd think it should be able to the same with s.TutorId != null.
The only reliable way is if you can construct the LINQ query in such a way that the relationships are "navigated" from the required end to optional end through SelectMany, which I guess makes it not generally applicable.
For demonstration purposes, if you write the sample query like this
var result = db.Tutors
.SelectMany(t => t.Students, (t, s) => new { StudentName = s.Name, TutorName = t.Name })
.ToList();
the generated SQL will be something like this
SELECT
[Extent1].[Id] AS [Id],
[Extent2].[Name] AS [Name],
[Extent1].[Name] AS [Name1]
FROM [dbo].[Tutors] AS [Extent1]
INNER JOIN [dbo].[Students] AS [Extent2] ON [Extent1].[Id] = [Extent2].[TutorId]
At this case you should join tables explicitly, instead of calling tutor as student's property:
var result = (from s in context.Students
join t in context.Tutors
on s.TutorId equals t.Id
select new
{
StudentName = s.Name,
TutorName = t.Name
}).ToLost();
I'm attempting to convert the following SQL Server query into a GreenPlum version of the query:
INSERT INTO #TMP1 (part_id, file_id, location, measure_date)
SELECT DISTINCT
pt.part_id, qf.file_id, qf.edl_desc, pt.measure_date
FROM
part pt WITH (NOLOCK)
INNER JOIN
file_model qm with (nolock) on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN
file qf with (nolock) on qf.file_id = qm.file_id;
INSERT INTO #part_list (file_id, part_id, measure_date)
SELECT DISTINCT
t1.file_id, k.part_id, k.measure_date
FROM
#TMP1 t1 WITH (NOLOCK)
CROSS APPLY
(SELECT DISTINCT TOP (300)
t2.part_id, t2.measure_date
FROM
#TMP1 t2 WITH (NOLOCK)
WHERE
t1.file_id = t2.file_id and t1.location = t2.location
ORDER BY
t2.measure_date DESC) k
WHERE
t1.measure_date >= dateadd(day, 30, getdate());
The idea here being that the final table contains the most recent up to 300 parts for all parts programs that are active (ie manufactured something) in the last 30 days.
Per the answers to this question, I am aware that LATERAL JOIN would do it, except my organization is using an older version of Postgres that does not have LATERAL, so I was left with implementing the following function instead:
CREATE FUNCTION BuildActiveParts(p_day INT, p_n INT)
RETURNS SETOF RECORD --TABLE (part_id bigint,file_id int, measure_date timestamp, location varchar(255))
AS $$
DECLARE
part_active RECORD;
part_list RECORD;
BEGIN
FOR part_active IN
SELECT DISTINCT qf.file_id, qf.location
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id WHERE pt.measure_date >= current_date - p_day LOOP
FOR part_list IN
SELECT DISTINCT pt.part_id, qf.file_id, pt.measure_date, qf.location
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id WHERE qf.file_id = part_active.file_id
AND qf.location = part_active.location
ORDER BY pt.measure_date DESC LIMIT p_n LOOP
RETURN NEXT part_list;
END LOOP;
END LOOP;
END
$$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
-- Later used in:
--Build list of all active programs in last p_day days. This temporary table is a component of a larger function that produces a table based on this and other other calculations, called daily.
-- Note: this insert yields 'function cannot execute because it accesses relation'
INSERT INTO TMP_part_list ( part_id, file_id, measure_date, location)
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM BuildActiveParts(p_day, p_n) AS active_parts (part_id int, file_id text, measure_date timestamp, location text )
;
Unfortunately, this function is used in inserts to another table (an unavoidable reality of my business requirements), so while the function returns nice happy results when run in isolation, I get a big angry function cannot execute on segment because it accesses relation when I try to use it for its intended purpose. While I've seen suggestions to the effect of "make a VIEW instead", that's not really an option because a view resulting from the script this functionality is a part of would take too long to query.
What can I do, beyond embarking on a months-long excursion through a jungle of red tape to convince my organization to update their stuff, to resolve this?
Edit: Here are some attempts based on comments:
Attempt with function, did not work because of function cannot execute on segment because it accesses relation:
DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS BuildRecentParts(TEXT, TEXT, INT);
CREATE FUNCTION BuildRecentParts(file_id TEXT, location_in TEXT, p_n INT)
RETURNS SETOF RECORD --TABLE (measure_date timestamp, part_id bigint)
AS $$
DECLARE
part_list RECORD;
BEGIN
FOR part_list IN
SELECT DISTINCT pt.measure_date, pt.part_id
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id
WHERE qf.file_id = file_id
AND qf.edl_desc = location_in
ORDER BY pt.measure_date DESC LIMIT p_n LOOP
RETURN NEXT part_list;
END LOOP;
END
$$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
SELECT DISTINCT qf.file_id, qf.edl_desc, (SELECT pti.measure_date, pti.part_id FROM part pti
INNER JOIN file_model qmi on qmi.file_model_id = pti.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qfi on qfi.file_id = qmi.file_id
WHERE qfi.file_id = qf.file_id
AND qfi.edl_desc = qf.edl_desc
ORDER BY pti.measure_date DESC LIMIT 300)
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id
WHERE pt.measure_date >= current_date - 30 ;
Attempt without function, will not work because subquery has multiple columns:
CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE TMP_TMP1 (part_id bigint, file_id varchar(255), location varchar(255), measure_date timestamp) DISTRIBUTED BY (part_id);
INSERT INTO TMP_TMP1 (part_id, file_id, location, measure_date)
SELECT DISTINCT pt.part_id, qf.file_id, qf.edl_desc, pt.measure_date
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id;
ANALYZE TMP_TMP1;
SELECT DISTINCT t1.file_id, t1.location, (SELECT t2.measure_date, t2.part_id FROM TMP_TMP1 t2
WHERE t2.file_id = t1.file_id
AND t2.location = t1.location
ORDER BY t2.measure_date DESC LIMIT 300)
FROM TMP_TMP1 t1
WHERE t1.measure_date >= current_date - 30;
I also attempted a recursive CTE, but found that that was unsupported.
Between answers here and from architects at my organization, we decided that we have struck a GreenPlum limitation that would be too costly to overcome, the logic that performs the Cross Join will be shifted to the R script that calls the stored procedure that this functionality would have been a part of.
Well, Greenplum doesn't have dirty reads so you can't implement the nolock hint you have. That is probably a good thing too. I would recommend removing that from SQL Server too.
I think the best solution is to use an Analytical function here instead of that function or even a correlated subquery which Greenplum supports. It is also more efficient in SQL Server to use this approach.
SELECT sub2.part_id, sub2.location, sub2.measure_date
FROM (
SELECT sub1.part_id, sub1.location, sub1.measure_date, row_number() over(partition by sub1.part_id order by sub1.measure_date desc) as rownum
FROM (
SELECT pt.part_id, qf.edl_desc as location, pt.measure_date
FROM part pt
INNER JOIN file_model qm on qm.file_model_id = pt.file_model_id
INNER JOIN file qf on qf.file_id = qm.file_id
WHERE pt.measure_date >= (now() - interval '30 days')
GROUP BY pt.part_id, qf.edl_desc, pt.measure_date
) AS sub1
) as sub2
WHERE sub2.rownum <= 300;
Now, I had to guess at your data because it looks like you could get into trouble with your original query if you have multiple qf.qcc_file_desc values because your original group by includes this. If you had multiple values, then things would get ugly.
I'm also not 100% sure on the row_number function without knowing your data. It might be this instead:
row_number() over(partition by sub1.part_id, sub1.location order by sub1.measure_date desc)
I have an SQL query, it is running on MSSQL 2008 R2
View vMobileLastMobileHistory has about 1000 rows and
select * from vMobileLastMobileHistory is taking 0.2 sec
but this query is taking 5 seconds, how can I optimize this code?
(I think the problem is INTERSECT but I dont know how change this)
SELECT DISTINCT *
FROM
(
SELECT vMobileLastMobileHistory.*
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory
LEFT OUTER JOIN MobileType_DomainAction ON
MobileType_DomainAction.tiMobileType = vMobileLastMobileHistory.tiMobileType
LEFT OUTER JOIN MobileType_User ON
MobileType_User.MobileID = MobileType_DomainAction.ID
WHERE MobileType_User.UserID = #UserID OR #UserID = - 1
INTERSECT
SELECT vMobileLastMobileHistory.*
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory
LEFT OUTER JOIN dbo.Region_User ON
dbo.vMobileLastMobileHistory.strRegion = dbo.Region_User.strRegion
WHERE Region_User.iSystemUser = #UserID OR #UserID = - 1
INTERSECT
SELECT vMobileLastMobileHistory.*
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory
LEFT OUTER JOIN Contractor_User ON
vMobileLastMobileHistory.strContractor = Contractor_User.strContractor
WHERE Contractor_User.iSystemUser = #UserID OR #UserID = - 1
)
The problem is that if you have any indexes on your iSytemUser columns, the optimise is unable to use them because it has to account for a specific userID being passed, or returning all results, it would be better to logically separate your two cases. In addition, since you don't care about any columns in the auxiliary tables, you could use EXISTS in your case of specific users to take advantage of a semi join:
IF (#UserID = -1)
BEGIN
SELECT DISTINCT *
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory;
END
ELSE
BEGIN
SELECT DISTINCT *
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory AS mh
WHERE EXISTS
( SELECT 1
FROM Contractor_User AS cu
WHERE cu.strContractor = mh.strContractor
AND cu.iSystemUser = #UserID
)
AND EXISTS
( SELECT 1
FROM Region_User AS ru
WHERE ru.strRegion = mh.strRegion
AND ru.iSystemUser = #UserID
)
AND EXISTS
( SELECT 1
FROM MobileType_DomainAction AS da
INNER JOIN MobileType_User AS mu
ON mu.MobileID = da.ID
WHERE da.tiMobileType = mh.tiMobileType
AND mu.iSystemUser = #UserID
);
END
Now you can have two execution plans for each case (returning all results, or for a specific user), in each case you only need to read from vMobileLastMobileHistory once, and you also limit the sorts required by removing the INTERSECT and replacing with 3 EXISTS clauses.
If they don't already exist then you may also which to consider some indexes on your tables. A good way of finding out what indexes would help is to run the query in SQL Server Management Studio with the option "Show Actual Execution Plan" enabled, this will then show you any missing indexes.
Most of time Intersect and Inner Join will be same. You are not share your data, so based on my knowledge and this link, I just replace intersect query into Inner join query as :
--I think you don't need distinct upper query. If you have issue inform me.
SELECT DISTINCT vml.*
FROM vMobileLastMobileHistory vml
LEFT OUTER JOIN MobileType_DomainAction mtda ON mtda.tiMobileType = vml.tiMobileType
LEFT OUTER JOIN MobileType_User ON MobileType_User.MobileID = mtda.ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN dbo.Region_User ON dbo.vml.strRegion = dbo.Region_User.strRegion
LEFT OUTER JOIN Contractor_User ON vml.strContractor = Contractor_User.strContractor
WHERE
(MobileType_User.UserID = #UserID
and Region_User.iSystemUser = #UserID or Contractor_User.iSystemUser = #UserID
) OR #UserID = - 1
I have a complex query with multiple joins in it, which runs multiple times in my application. I want to write this query as a function by breaking this query into smaller pieces inside the function. As a newbie, I have limited knowledge on SQL Server.
The following is the query:
SELECT
ts.lable as label,
ts.percentage as rate
FROM
TaxSet ts
JOIN
UserInfo u ON u.userID = ?
AND u.countryID = ts.countryId
AND (ts.stateId IS NULL OR ts.stateId = 0 OR LEN(ts.stateId) < 1)
JOIN
Users us ON u.userID = us.id
JOIN
Users p ON us.parentID = p.id
AND ts.ispID = p.id
JOIN
ProductType pt ON ts.productTypeID = pt.id
WHERE
startDate <= getutcdate()
AND getutcdate() <= endDate
AND pt.identifier = ?
AND ts.id NOT IN (SELECT eu.ispTaxSettingId
FROM ExemptUsers eu
WHERE eu.ExemptUserId = ?)
Now, how can I write a function by breaking this query into smaller ones.
Thanks in advance.
May I ask why you want to split it into functions? I reformatted your code and have put it into a stored procedure for now. My thinking is that you want to pass through a Identifier and UserID which are the parameters of your query.
I have modified the query and removed the Not In statement. This has been replaced by a LEFT JOIN to ExemptUsers on u.id = eu.ExemptUserID and then an addition to the WHERE clause to ensure eu.ExemptUserID is NULL. This is basically a clearer way of saying "If the userID exists in table ExemptUsers do not bring back results for that user".
In addition I have removed the join to Users p as I can't see that this was being used in any way, unless you want to ensure that the user has a parent?
CREATE PROCEDURE wsp_StoredProcName
(#UserID int,
#Identifier int)
AS
BEGIN
SELECT
ts.lable as label,
ts.percentage as rate
FROM
TaxSet ts
INNER JOIN UserInfo u ON u.userID = ts.UserID
AND u.countryID = ts.countryId
INNER JOIN Users us on u.userID = us.id
INNER JOIN ProductType pt on ts.productTypeID = pt.id
LEFT JOIN ExemptUsers eu on u.id = eu.ExemptUserID
WHERE
(
ts.UserID = #UserID
and pt.identifier = #Identifier
and startDate <= getutcdate()
and getutcdate() <= endDate
AND eu.ExemptUserID IS NULL
and
(
ts.stateId is null or ts.stateId = 0 or len(ts.stateId) < 1
)
)
END
After all you select from TaxSet where certain conditions must be met: The date range, the state, a relation to a particular user and its parent, a relation to a particular product type, and the non-existence for a particular exempt user. So use EXISTS and NOT EXISTS throughout your query in order to make it plain to the reader and dbms what you want to achieve. The more straight-forward a query, the easier it often is for the optimizer to deal with it.
select
ts.lable as label,
ts.percentage as rate
from taxset ts
where getutcdate() between ts.startdate and ts.enddate
and (stateid is null or stateid between 0 and 9)
and exists
(
select *
from users u
join userinfo ui on ui.userid = u.id
where u.id = ?
and ui.countryid = ts.countryid
and u.parentid = ts.ispid
)
and exists
(
select *
from producttype pt
where pt.identifier = ?
and pt.id = ts.producttypeid
)
and not exists
(
select *
from exemptusers eu
where eu.exemptuserid = ?
and eu.isptaxsettingid = ts.id
);
As others have mentioned: When splitting a query into smaller parts and execute these separately, it usually becomes slower not faster. This is due to the fact that a dbms is made to do exactly this in the most efficient way internally. Of course sometimes a dbms' optimizer fails to find a good execution plan, though. You may want to look at the execution plan and check whether you find that plan appropriate.