惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

F
Full Disclosure
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
小众软件
小众软件
Cloudbric
Cloudbric
AWS News Blog
AWS News Blog
腾讯CDC
量子位
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
V
Vulnerabilities – Threatpost
Scott Helme
Scott Helme
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园_首页
C
CXSECURITY Database RSS Feed - CXSecurity.com
The Hacker News
The Hacker News
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
IT之家
IT之家
Jina AI
Jina AI
Attack and Defense Labs
Attack and Defense Labs
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
Simon Willison's Weblog
Simon Willison's Weblog
The Cloudflare Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
博客园 - 【当耐特】
Google Online Security Blog
Google Online Security Blog
美团技术团队
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
V
Visual Studio Blog
罗磊的独立博客
L
LINUX DO - 最新话题
博客园 - Franky
博客园 - 叶小钗
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
The Last Watchdog
The Last Watchdog
J
Java Code Geeks
AI
AI
C
Cisco Blogs
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
C
Cyber Attacks, Cyber Crime and Cyber Security
Cisco Talos Blog
Cisco Talos Blog
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
雷峰网
雷峰网
Help Net Security
Help Net Security
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
I
Intezer
S
Securelist

Anže's Blog

The 15-Year-Old iptables Rule That Broke My DNS Fedidevs 9h Outage Postmortem Letting Claude Upgrade My Raspberry Pi Agents Day Lisbon DjangoCon Europe 2026 How to Safely Update Your Dependencies Speeding Up Django Startup Times with Lazy Imports Typing Your Django Project in 2026 Claude Fixes User Bug Jekyll to Hugo Migration Advent of Code 2025 🎄 Django bulk_update Memory Issue Migrating Gunicorn to Granian Disable Network Requests When Running Pytest Disable Runserver Warning in Django 5.2 Autogenerating og:images with Jekyll Power Outages and Gunicorn PID Files UV with Django Go-like Error Handling Makes No Sense in JavaScript or Python Packages Do Not Match the Hashes Pip Error Gotchas with SQLite in Production Fedidevs Dev Update #2 Django SQLite Production Config Django Streaming HTTP Responses Deploying a Django Project to My Raspberry Pi (Video) Thoughts on Code Reviews Django SQLite Benchmark Django, SQLite, and the Database Is Locked Error No Downtime Deployments with Gunicorn SQLite Write-Ahead Logging Writing a Pytest Plugin Fedidevs Dev Update #1 Django-TUI: A Text User Interface for Django Commands Automate Hatch Publish with GitHub Actions Words TUI: App for Daily Writing Textual App Auto Reload RDS Blue/Green Deployments Fly.io Certificate Renewal Using Testing Library with Selenium in Python The Fastest Way to Build a Read-only JSON API import __hello__ Enum with `str` or `int` Mixin Breaking Change in Python 3.11 Your Code Doesn't Have to Be Perfect Fixing _SixMetaPathImporter.find_spec() Not Found Warnings in Python 3.10 Upgrading Django App to Python 3.10 Integer Overflow Error in a Python Application Python Dependency Management New Features in Python 3.8 and 3.9 The Code Review Batch Size The Code Review Bottleneck
MySQL Performance Degradation in Django 3.1
Anže Pečar · 2022-01-21 · via Anže's Blog

I spent the last week upgrading the Django application at work from version 2.2 to 3.2. The upgrade didn’t seem too challenging and I only had 84 tests to fix out of a total of 5580 when I started the process. Adam’s django-upgrade tool made some of the repetitive changes super easy. All in all, it looked like this was going to be a very straightforward upgrade.

I felt very confident when it was time to merge all the pull requests. I also didn’t expect any issues when it was time to deploy the changes to a production-like environment.

But soon after the deployment, I noticed that something was not working well. Queries that were fast before the deployment were now taking much much longer. The graph below shows how one query went from a sub-second execution time to over 1 minute:

Graph showing that query times have gone up significantly
New relic graph showing the query times have gone way up. The tail of the graph where the query times are back to normal was the result of the fix that I describe below.

If we pushed this code to production we would be dealing with at least a partial outage if not a full-blown outage.

A bug in Django

I noticed that the problematic query looked a bit different under Django 3.2 than it did under Django 2.2:

Django 3.2

SELECT
    `projects_project`.`id`
FROM
    `projects_project`
WHERE (NOT `projects_project`.`deleted`
    AND `projects_project`.`archived`
    AND `projects_project`.`date_due` <= '2022-01-20 15:16:41');

Django 2.2

SELECT
    `projects_project`.`id`
FROM
    `projects_project`
WHERE (`projects_project`.`deleted` = 0
    AND `projects_project`.`archived` = 1
    AND `projects_project`.`date_due` <= '2022-01-20 15:16:41');

As far as I know, this change was not documented in any of the 3.x changelogs, so it took me by surprise.

Why such a difference in performance on equivalent queries?

I need to mention that we are using MySQL 5.7 which does not have a native boolean column type. Because of this, Django uses a tinyint column for BooleanFields on your models.

When MySQL 5.7 sees projects_project.archived it interprets it as a range query. The range for the query goes through all possible values of the column. For tinyint these are integers from -128 to 127, excluding zero.

The problem with range queries is that after the first range lookup the database can no longer use other keys in the compositive index. In our case, we had an index on archived, deleted, and date_due, but because of the range over completed the query was not able to filter values based on the other two index keys.

We can see this by running the EXPLAIN query and compare the number of rows scanned:

rows: 26518
filtered: 8.10

Where the query with deleted = 0 and archived = 1 filtered out many more rows with the index:

rows: 1
filtered: 10.00

The solution(s)

With help from Bery and Boxed from the Unofficial Django Discord I found a Django Bug report on this exact issue. There was even a fix for it merged a few months back! 🎉

The only problem was that the fix was merged into the main branch, and due to Django’s backporting policy won’t make it into Django 3.2 or even into 4.0.

The discussion on the bug ticket did mention a workaround. You can wrap values with models.Value() in your filter statements and Django will keep the query as-is.


Project.objects.filter(deleted=models.Value(0), archived=models.Value(1))

For me, this wasn’t a good solution because the number of different queries that I would need to update was just too big.

Luckily, applying the fix from the pull request to our codebase wasn’t that hard. We have already overwritten methods inside DatabaseOperations due to a completely unrelated problem. I just needed to copy the conditional_expression_supported_in_where_clause function from the pull request to our codebase and the problem went away!

The full solution for those curios (or facing the same problem) looks like this:

  • Create a dbengine module somewhere in your application code (e.g. yourapp.dbengine) and create a base.py file with the following content:
from django.db.backends.mysql import base
from django.db.models import Exists, ExpressionWrapper, Lookup

class DatabaseOperations(base.DatabaseOperations):
    def conditional_expression_supported_in_where_clause(self, expression): 
        # MySQL ignores indexes with boolean fields unless they're compared 
        # directly to a boolean value.
        if isinstance(expression, (Exists, Lookup)):
            return True
        if isinstance(expression, ExpressionWrapper) and expression.conditional:
            return self.conditional_expression_supported_in_where_clause(
                expression.expression
            )
        if getattr(expression, "conditional", False):
            return False
        return super().conditional_expression_supported_in_where_clause(expression)


class DatabaseWrapper(base.DatabaseWrapper):
    ops_class = DatabaseOperations
  • Change the DATABASE["default"]["engine"] in settings.py to be: yourapp.dbengine.

And that’s it! Just don’t forget that you can remove this workaround when you upgrade to Django 4.1.

Fin

We were lucky that we caught this issue before deploying to production and we completely understand that the Django team has limited resources and can’t always patch every single issue in every version. MySQL is also a lot less used than SQLite and PostgreSQL according to the last Django survey by JetBrains.

The community around Django is amazing though and that is a major part of the reason we continue being happy with Django and don’t see ourselves switching to any other framework in the foreseeable future ❤️