issues
3 rows where repo = 140912432, type = "issue" and user = 96218 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: comments, created_at (date), updated_at (date), closed_at (date)
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
688670158 | MDU6SXNzdWU2ODg2NzAxNTg= | 147 | SQLITE_MAX_VARS maybe hard-coded too low | simonwiles 96218 | open | 0 | 7 | 2020-08-30T07:26:45Z | 2021-02-15T21:27:55Z | CONTRIBUTOR | I came across this while about to open an issue and PR against the documentation for As mentioned in #145, while:
it is common that it is increased at compile time. Debian-based systems, for example, seem to ship with a version of sqlite compiled with SQLITE_MAX_VARIABLE_NUMBER set to 250,000, and I believe this is the case for homebrew installations too. In working to understand what Unfortunately, it seems that Obviously this couldn't be relied upon in |
sqlite-utils 140912432 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/147/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
||||||||
688659182 | MDU6SXNzdWU2ODg2NTkxODI= | 145 | Bug when first record contains fewer columns than subsequent records | simonwiles 96218 | closed | 0 | 2 | 2020-08-30T05:44:44Z | 2020-09-08T23:21:23Z | 2020-09-08T23:21:23Z | CONTRIBUTOR |
I suspect that this bug is masked somewhat by the fact that while:
it is common that it is increased at compile time. Debian-based systems, for example, seem to ship with a version of sqlite compiled with A test for this issue might look like this:
The best solution, I think, is simply to process all the records when determining columns, column types, and the batch size. In my tests this doesn't seem to be particularly costly at all, and cuts out a lot of complications (including obviating my implementation of #139 at #142). I'll raise a PR for your consideration. |
sqlite-utils 140912432 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/145/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
686978131 | MDU6SXNzdWU2ODY5NzgxMzE= | 139 | insert_all(..., alter=True) should work for new columns introduced after the first 100 records | simonwiles 96218 | closed | 0 | 7 | 2020-08-27T06:25:25Z | 2020-08-28T22:48:51Z | 2020-08-28T22:30:14Z | CONTRIBUTOR | Is there a way to make I'm using It took me a while to find this little snippet in the documentation for
I tried changing the Is there a way around this that you would suggest? It seems like it should raise an exception at least. |
sqlite-utils 140912432 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/139/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
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]);