issues

Table actions

9 rows where "closed_at" is on date 2022-01-11 and user = 9599 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date), closed_at (date)

type 2

state 1

repo 1

id node_id number title user state locked assignee milestone comments created_at updated_at ▲ closed_at author_association pull_request body repo type active_lock_reason performed_via_github_app reactions draft state_reason
1099584685 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BilSt 381 `sqlite-utils rows` options `--limit` and `--offset` simonw 9599 closed 0     2 2022-01-11T20:23:12Z 2022-01-11T23:33:37Z 2022-01-11T23:19:36Z OWNER  

Because I often want to use it just to preview a few rows from the database. Piping through | head -n 20 works for JSON and CSV (they stream) but not for --table.

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/381/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1099585611 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BilhL 382 `--where` option for `sqlite-rows` simonw 9599 closed 0     1 2022-01-11T20:24:23Z 2022-01-11T23:33:14Z 2022-01-11T23:32:47Z OWNER  

CLI equivalent of table.rows_where() - should accept parameters too. Work on this at the same time as #381.

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/382/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1099586786 I_kwDOCGYnMM5Bilzi 383 Add documentation page with the output of `--help` simonw 9599 closed 0     4 2022-01-11T20:25:58Z 2022-01-11T22:55:05Z 2022-01-11T21:44:05Z OWNER  

Can be maintained using cog from #373. Similar in purpose to the API reference page, but this is for the CLI.

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/383/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1098574572 I_kwDOCGYnMM5Beurs 380 Release notes for 3.21 simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 1 2022-01-11T02:12:30Z 2022-01-11T02:34:26Z 2022-01-11T02:34:26Z OWNER   sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/380/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1097251014 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BZrjG 375 `sqlite-utils bulk` command simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 3 2022-01-09T17:12:38Z 2022-01-11T02:12:58Z 2022-01-11T02:10:55Z OWNER  

The .executemany() method is a very efficient way to execute the same SQL query against a huge list of parameters.

sqlite-utils insert supports a bunch of ways of loading a list of dictionaries - from CSV, TSV, JSON, newline JSON and more thanks to: - #361

What if you could load a list of dictionaries and provide a SQL query with :named parameters that correspond to keys in those dictionaries instead?

This would need to be a new command - I thought about adding a --sql option to insert but that doesn't make sense as that command already requires a table name.

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/375/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1097477582 PR_kwDOCGYnMM4wtl17 377 `sqlite-utils bulk` command simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 3 2022-01-10T05:34:24Z 2022-01-11T02:10:57Z 2022-01-11T02:10:54Z OWNER simonw/sqlite-utils/pulls/377

Refs #375

Still needs:

  • [x] Refactor @insert_upsert_options so that it doesn't duplicate @import_options
  • [x] Tests
  • [x] Documentation
  • [x] Try it against a really big file
 sqlite-utils 140912432 pull     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/377/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 0  
1098544628 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BenX0 379 CLI options for running ANALYZE simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 0 2022-01-11T01:09:16Z 2022-01-11T01:38:01Z 2022-01-11T01:36:48Z OWNER  

The Python methods are all done now, next step is the CLI options. I'll do those in a separate issue.

Originally posted by @simonw in https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366#issuecomment-1009508865

  • [x] sqlite-utils analyze command
  • [x] sqlite-utils create-index --analyze option (see #365)
  • [x] sqlite-utils insert --analyze option
  • [x] sqlite-utils upsert --analyze option

In #378 I also added .delete_where(..., analyze=True) but there isn't currently a sqlite-utils delete-where CLI command - deletions via CLI are expected to be handled using SQL queries.

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/379/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1096563265 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BXDpB 366 Python library methods for calling ANALYZE simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 10 2022-01-07T18:28:01Z 2022-01-11T01:09:33Z 2022-01-11T01:09:33Z OWNER   sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed
1098309897 I_kwDOCGYnMM5BduEJ 378 analyze=True parameter for some methods simonw 9599 closed 0   3.21 7558727 0 2022-01-10T19:54:52Z 2022-01-11T01:08:11Z 2022-01-11T01:08:09Z OWNER  

This would cause ANALYZE to be run against the relevant table at the end of executing the method.

Having browsed the API reference I think the methods that would benefit from an analyze=True parameter are:

  • [x] table.create_index
  • [x] table.insert_all
  • [x] table.upsert_all
  • [x] table.delete_where

Originally posted by @simonw in https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/366#issuecomment-1009288898

 sqlite-utils 140912432 issue     
{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/378/reactions",
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   completed

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issues] (
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [number] INTEGER,
   [title] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [state] TEXT,
   [locked] INTEGER,
   [assignee] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [milestone] INTEGER REFERENCES [milestones]([id]),
   [comments] INTEGER,
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [closed_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [pull_request] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [repo] INTEGER REFERENCES [repos]([id]),
   [type] TEXT
, [active_lock_reason] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [draft] INTEGER, [state_reason] TEXT);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_repo]
                ON [issues] ([repo]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_milestone]
                ON [issues] ([milestone]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_assignee]
                ON [issues] ([assignee]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_user]
                ON [issues] ([user]);