|
my dude, if 4 joins in a query is the worst act you have committed, you're doing just fine
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 00:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
Bloody posted:did write one ugly query that had four joins in it lol one for each tire
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
4 joins is nothing
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
it felt very tiresome to write but then it turned a lovely pile of hacks that took 30 seconds into a lovely pile of hacks that took 30 milliseconds so i guess it was worthwhile then i copy-pasted more or less the same query but with trivial differences into like 14 different places in my single database accessing class because literally everything is a lovely pile of hacks Zamujasa posted:one for each tire exactly!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:4 joins is nothing
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 07:57
|
|
|
n/m
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 08:13
|
|
|
Bloody posted:then i copy-pasted more or less the same query but with trivial differences into like 14 different places in my single database accessing class depending on your database engine and use of this join and attitude, creating a view might be more needs-suiting over the long term than mostly-duplicated query text
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:42
|
|
|
i wrote a union yesterday to collapse two rows with distinct joins and values into a single one and felt like there had to be a better way
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Share Bear posted:i wrote a union yesterday to collapse two rows with distinct joins and values into a single one and felt like there had to be a better way what? doesn't a union take two separate queries and give you all the rows from both of them? isn't that the opposite of what you are describing? or did you do a self-join on an (intermediate query using union) in order to have a single output row with columns from two different input rows? Sounds like something you could do using just joins, but might have been easier this way because the joinery was already too complicated
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
prisoner of waffles posted:what? doesn't a union take two separate queries and give you all the rows from both of them? isn't that the opposite of what you are describing? I think they made a list of rows which match either (condition A and condition B) or (condition C and condition D)
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
just 4 joins and no subqueries? this is heaven
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
Bloody posted:btw my database is real and strong and it is my friend
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
imagine 4 joins on the edge of a query
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
no where clause? that's madness!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 06:01
|
|
|
smdh if you use where instead of on
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 06:50
|
|
|
i prefer the using clause when possible 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
DELETE CASCADE posted:i prefer the using clause when possible holy poo poo I've always thought that is something which should exist too bad it's not in t-sql
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
~Coxy posted:holy poo poo I've always thought that is something which should exist same https://twitter.com/symbolicbutt/status/892120929769320450
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 10:03
|
|