issue_comments
19 rows where "created_at" is on date 2022-01-08 sorted by created_at
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: issue_url, updated_at (date)
user 3
- simonw 13
- fgregg 5
- codecov[bot] 1
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at ▼ | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1007844190 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/1574#issuecomment-1007844190 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1574 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c48Ente | fgregg 536941 | 2022-01-08T00:42:12Z | 2022-01-08T00:42:12Z | CONTRIBUTOR | is there a reason to not always use the slim option? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
introduce new option for datasette package to use a slim base image 1084193403 | |
1008129841 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008129841 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48Ftcx | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T20:04:42Z | 2022-01-08T20:04:42Z | OWNER | It would be easier to test this if I had a utility for streaming out a file one line at a time. A few recipes for this in https://superuser.com/questions/526242/cat-file-to-terminal-at-particular-speed-of-lines-per-second - I'm going to build a quick |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008143248 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008143248 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48FwuQ | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T20:34:12Z | 2022-01-08T20:34:12Z | OWNER | Built that tool: https://github.com/simonw/stream-delay and https://pypi.org/project/stream-delay/ |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008151884 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008151884 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48Fy1M | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T20:59:21Z | 2022-01-08T20:59:21Z | OWNER | (That Heroku example doesn't record the timestamp, which limits its usefulness) |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008153586 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008153586 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48FzPy | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:06:15Z | 2022-01-08T21:06:15Z | OWNER | I added a print statement after |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008154873 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008154873 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48Fzj5 | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:11:55Z | 2022-01-08T21:11:55Z | OWNER | I'm suspicious that the In [11]: [list(d) for d in list(chunks('abcdefghi', 5))] Out[11]: [['a'], ['b'], ['c'], ['d'], ['e'], ['f'], ['g'], ['h'], ['i']] In [12]: [list(d) for d in list(chunks('abcdefghi', 3))] Out[12]: [['a'], ['b'], ['c'], ['d'], ['e'], ['f'], ['g'], ['h'], ['i']] ``` |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008155916 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364#issuecomment-1008155916 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/364 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48Fz0M | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:16:46Z | 2022-01-08T21:16:46Z | OWNER | No, |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
`--batch-size 1` doesn't seem to commit for every item 1095570074 | |
1008157132 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366#issuecomment-1008157132 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F0HM | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:23:08Z | 2022-01-08T21:25:05Z | OWNER | Running This should be added to the default list of hidden tables in Datasette. It looks something like this: | tbl | idx | stat | |---------------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------| | _counts | sqlite_autoindex__counts_1 | 5 1 | | global-power-plants_fts_config | global-power-plants_fts_config | 1 1 | | global-power-plants_fts_docsize | | 33643 | | global-power-plants_fts_idx | global-power-plants_fts_idx | 199 40 1 | | global-power-plants_fts_data | | 136 | | global-power-plants | "global-power-plants_owner" | 33643 4 | | global-power-plants | "global-power-plants_country_long" | 33643 202 |
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Python library methods for calling ANALYZE 1096563265 | |
1008157908 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1587#issuecomment-1008157908 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1587 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c48F0TU | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:29:06Z | 2022-01-08T21:29:06Z | OWNER | Depending on the SQLite version (and compile options) that ran
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add `sqlite_stat1`(-4) tables to hidden table list 1097040427 | |
1008157998 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1587#issuecomment-1008157998 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1587 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c48F0Uu | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:29:54Z | 2022-01-08T21:29:54Z | OWNER | { "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Add `sqlite_stat1`(-4) tables to hidden table list 1097040427 | ||
1008158357 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008158357 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F0aV | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:33:07Z | 2022-01-08T21:33:07Z | OWNER | The one thing that worries me a little bit about doing this by default is that it adds a surprising new table to the database - it may be confusing to users if they run Options here are:
I'm currently leading towards that third option - @fgregg any thoughts? |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008158616 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366#issuecomment-1008158616 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F0eY | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T21:35:32Z | 2022-01-08T21:35:32Z | OWNER | Built a prototype in a branch, see #367. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Python library methods for calling ANALYZE 1096563265 | |
1008158799 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/367#issuecomment-1008158799 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/367 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F0hP | codecov[bot] 22429695 | 2022-01-08T21:36:55Z | 2022-01-09T02:34:44Z | NONE | Codecov Report
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ main #367 +/-==========================================
- Coverage 96.44% 96.24% -0.21% | Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| sqlite_utils/db.py | Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
Initial prototype of .analyze() methods 1097041471 | |
1008161965 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008161965 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F1St | fgregg 536941 | 2022-01-08T22:02:56Z | 2022-01-08T22:02:56Z | CONTRIBUTOR | for options 2 and 3, i would worry about discoverablity. in other db’s it is not necessary to explicitly call analyze for most indices. ie for postgres
i suppose i would propose raising a warning if the stats table is created that explains what is going on and informs users about a —no-analyze argument. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008163050 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008163050 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F1jq | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T22:10:51Z | 2022-01-08T22:10:51Z | OWNER | Is there a downside to having a Imagine the following sequence of events:
The user now has a database file with several million records and a statistics table that is wildly out of date, having been populated when they only had a few. Will this result in surprisingly bad query performance compared to it that statistics table did not exist at all? If so, I lean much harder towards |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008163585 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008163585 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F1sB | simonw 9599 | 2022-01-08T22:14:39Z | 2022-01-09T03:03:07Z | OWNER | The reason I'm hesitating on this is that I've not actually used ANALYZE at all in nearly five years of messing around with SQLite! So I'm nervous that there are surprise downsides I haven't thought of. My hunch is that ANALYZE is only worth worrying about on much larger databases, in which case I'm OK supporting it as a thoroughly documented power-user feature rather than a default. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008164116 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008164116 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F10U | fgregg 536941 | 2022-01-08T22:18:57Z | 2022-01-08T22:18:57Z | CONTRIBUTOR | the table with the query ran so bad was about 50k. i think the scenario should not be worse than no stats. i also did not know that sqlite was so different from postgres and needed an explicit analyze call. |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008164786 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008164786 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F1-y | fgregg 536941 | 2022-01-08T22:24:19Z | 2022-01-08T22:24:19Z | CONTRIBUTOR | the out-of-date scenario you describe could be addressed by automatically adding an analyze to the insert or convert commands if they implicate an index |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 | |
1008166084 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365#issuecomment-1008166084 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/365 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM48F2TE | fgregg 536941 | 2022-01-08T22:32:47Z | 2022-01-08T22:32:47Z | CONTRIBUTOR | or using “ pragma optimize” |
{ "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
create-index should run analyze after creating index 1096558279 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) , [performed_via_github_app] TEXT); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
issue 6