◆Painscreener
ScreenerMatrixWatchlistCategoriesIndustries

Built for entrepreneurs finding problems worth solving.

SoftwareHardwareServiceLLMs.txt

MySQL ST_CONTAINS spatial queries extremely slow with spatial indexes is a software problem in Developer Tools. It has a heat score of 69 (demand) and competition score of 50 (existing solutions), creating an opportunity score of 48.9.

Back to Screener

MySQL ST_CONTAINS spatial queries extremely slow with spatial indexes

MySQL ST_CONTAINS queries for location data joins are taking ~16 seconds to retrieve only 1,000 records. Adding spatial indexes, forcing index use, and switching to ST_Within or MBRContains functions provide no performance improvement, making large-scale record processing infeasible.

Opportunity
50K-500K
softwareDeveloper ToolsMySQLST_CONTAINSspatial indexperformancegeospatial queriesUpdated Apr 4, 2026
Heat
6969

Demand intensity based on mentions and searches

Competition
5050

Market saturation from existing solutions

Opportunity
48.8848.9

Gap between demand and supply

Trend
→
stable

5 total mentions tracked

Trend Charts

Heat Score Over Time

Tracking demand intensity for MySQL ST_CONTAINS spatial queries extremely slow with spatial indexes

Competition Over Time

Market saturation trends

Opportunity Evolution

Combined view of heat vs competition showing the opportunity gap

Market Context

Adjacent problems in the same space

Lack of Vulkan-based browser alternatives
76
↓-6.9%
LLM bias reinforcement lacking safeguards
79
↑+16.2%
Ambiguous BEM methodology documentation
77
→
Authentication incompatible with ephemeral environments
69
→-1.4%
AI marketing hype misrepresents actual developer capabilities
70
→-1.4%

Source Samples (4)

Anonymized quotes showing where this pain point was expressed

redditNegative
139over 1 year ago
“AI Won't Replace Us Developers Yet (A Humble Reality Check) So there I was neck-deep in a MySQL nightmare. 🤯 Tried ChatGPT. Struck out. Claude? Nope. Gemini was a total bust as well. These AI models were giving me solutions that looked technically correct but were just wrong. Spent hours frustrated ready to tear my hair out. Then I did what we ALL do, Stack Overflow. And boom some legend had posted EXACTLY my problem from two years ago. With a solution written by an actual person. Commented, ex”
View source
stackexchangeNegative
25 months ago
“Performance issue with ST_CONTAINS I have a performance issue with a query in MySQL. I need to compare location data and am trying to use ST_CONTAINS in a join. However, I am having a performance issue as it is quite slow, taking around 16 seconds to retrieve 1,000 records. I need to process several thousand records in the query. I am searching the internet for the best solution. I have already tried using other checking functions, ST_Within and MBRContains. I added a spatial index for the geo c”
View source
stackexchangeNegative
27 months ago
“Postgres not using index with varchar_pattern_ops for pattern matching query I have a query in PostgresSQL accessing a big table using a LIKE clause for pattern matching: [code] The query has very good selectivity: [code] The application somtimes uses [code] at the end of the pattern, so replacing the [code] by [code] is not always possible I have created an index on that column with the matching operator definition: [code] But still, the pattern matching query does a Seq Scan: [code] If I repla”
View source
stackexchangeNegative
25 months ago
“Why does a DELETE with a JOIN on partitioned columns in BigQuery cost more than dropping specific partitions? I have a large BigQuery table, big_table, around 5 TB in size. It is partitioned by the column partition_date, which has about 2000 distinct values. I also have a smaller table, small_table, which contains only two distinct partition_date values and lists specific (partition_date, product_id) combinations that should be deleted from big_table. Example: -- big_table (partitioned by partit”
View source

Data Quality

Confidence
75%
ClassificationOpportunity
Audience
50K-500K
4 sources
Competition data
Estimated
Trend data
Tracked

Competition Analysis

Market saturation based on known solutions and category signals

Moderate Competition
50/100
Blue oceanRed ocean

Several solutions exist but there is room for differentiation through better UX, pricing, or focus.

Estimated

Based on heuristics. Will improve as real competition data is collected.

Next Steps

If you pursue this pain point...

Validation Checklist
ICP Hypothesis
  • •Tech-forward teams (10-50 employees)
  • •Companies already using related tools
  • •Decision-maker: Team lead or manager
  • •Budget: $10-50/user/month tolerance
MVP Ideas
  1. 1.Chrome extension or browser tool
  2. 2.Simple web app with core feature only
  3. 3.Slack/Discord bot integration
Watch Out For
  • •Integration with existing workflows
  • •Customer acquisition cost in this space

Related Pain Points

Similar problems you might want to explore

Pain PointHeatCompetitionOpportunityTrend
Lack of Vulkan-based browser alternatives
software
763962.57
↓-6.9%
LLM bias reinforcement lacking safeguards
software
794753.81
↑+16.2%
Ambiguous BEM methodology documentation
software
775052.97
→
Authentication incompatible with ephemeral environments
software
694948.55
→-1.4%
AI marketing hype misrepresents actual developer capabilities
software
705248.14
→-1.4%