Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@hest
Created February 4, 2014 06:08
Show Gist options
  • Save hest/8798884 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save hest/8798884 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Fast SQLAlchemy counting (avoid query.count() subquery)
def get_count(q):
count_q = q.statement.with_only_columns([func.count()]).order_by(None)
count = q.session.execute(count_q).scalar()
return count
q = session.query(TestModel).filter(...).order_by(...)
# Slow: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (SELECT ... FROM TestModel WHERE ...) ...
print q.count()
# Fast: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM TestModel WHERE ...
print get_count(q)
@davidjb99
Copy link

davidjb99 commented Nov 8, 2021

This worked perfectly for me after I upgraded from sa 1.3 to 1.4 and a count query went from 80ms to 800ms.

by switching form the built in .count() to the suggested first gist the query went back to 80ms. I believe the problem was .count() loading all columns into python which is not required and very slow for thousands or rows, using with_only_columns and removing the sub query took it back to 80ms. No idea what broke it in 1.4.

    count_q = q.statement.with_only_columns([func.count()]).order_by(None)
    count = q.session.execute(count_q).scalar()

I'm not sure why people are putting warnings on this gist or writing very long replies expecting help. If you are stuck ask on Stackoverflow!

My thanks to @hest

@kigawas
Copy link

kigawas commented Nov 9, 2021

This worked perfectly for me after I upgraded from sa 1.3 to 1.4 and a count query went from 80ms to 800ms.

by switching form the built in .count() to the suggested first gist the query went back to 80ms. I believe the problem was .count() loading all columns into python which is not required and very slow for thousands or rows, using with_only_columns and removing the sub query took it back to 80ms. No idea what broke it in 1.4.

    count_q = q.statement.with_only_columns([func.count()]).order_by(None)
    count = q.session.execute(count_q).scalar()

I'm not sure why people are putting warnings on this gist or writing very long replies expecting help. If you are stuck ask on Stackoverflow!

My thanks to @hest

This thread is generally a kind of misinformation. If you check the stackoverflow link above, these sqls are exactly the same:

-- on postgres
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT COUNT(*) FROM some_big_table WHERE some_col = 'some_val'
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ( SELECT col1, col2, col3, col4 FROM some_big_table WHERE some_col = 'some_val' )

If you find your query executing slow, the first is to try removing order by.

@davidjb99
Copy link

If you find your query executing slow, the first is to try removing order by.

I tried this, and the methods outlined in the stackoverflow link, and it did not work. Please don't say I'm providing misinformation by outlining what worked for me it is rude.

@kigawas
Copy link

kigawas commented Dec 20, 2021

@davidjb99

Sorry for letting you misunderstand. I meant the gist (which was posted in 2015) is likely misinformation now, not your comment.

@kannasuresh99
Copy link

This is the method, I'm using

def get_count(self, model_fields, filter_clause):
        """ Note: filter_clause should not be 'None' or 'Null' for this method to work """
        query = self.session.query().with_entities(*model_fields)
        query = query.filter(filter_clause)
        count_query = query.statement \
                .with_only_columns([func.count()]) \
                .order_by(None)
        result = query.session.execute(count_query).scalar()
        return result

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment