The Official Status Thread
-
>The SELECT statement cannot contain a subquery in the FROM clause
Your workaround would be to create a view for each of your subqueries.
Note that nesting views can cause serious performance penalties.FML...
-
I could go off you, y'know 😜😘
-
Note that nesting views can cause serious performance penalties.
By "serious" they mean "slows down to a fucking crawl".
Seriously, I had MySQL fetch the same data in under 100ms and over 5s. The difference? In first case I manually joined everything. In second case I dared to join a view already containing all those joins with a few more columns.
-
I had MySQL fetch the same data in under 100ms and over 5s. The difference? In first case I manually joined everything. In second case I dared to join a view already containing all those joins with a few more columns.
QFT. IIRC @PJH the besto course of action is replacing mysql. (sadly, i'm not joking)
Status: thinking about why i haven't read Dune yet.
-
Status: Faxing nonsense. Two T.38 (digital fax protocol) clients keep refusing to negotiate a T.38 session. Why? Fuck knows.
Fuck faxes in 20-fucking-15!
-
Status: Still reviewing theses. Found this nugget "... the cleavage of knowledge...".
Filed under:I think they mean "knowledge gap", but I would like to rest my head there for a while anyway.
-
Status: Qapla'!
Force everything to audio mode and risk corruption due to compression and UDP transfer. Fuck it. That's the only way it works.
-
Is there an equivalent term to kitsune for hedgehogs?
Status: Decided to adopt the word
harinezumi
for this purpose.As
kitsune
is Japanese for fox,harinezumi
is Japanese for hedgehog.
-
Seriously, I had MySQL fetch the same data in under 100ms and over 5s. The difference? In first case I manually joined everything. In second case I dared to join a view already containing all those joins with a few more columns.
I've had similar issues with Oracle. Fucking views. More trouble than they're worth.
-
I've had similar issues with Oracle. Fucking views. More trouble than they're worth.
Works fine in Postgres (for now, YMMV) if you don't try to do something really stupid and confuse the query planner. But you can do that without views as well.
-
I've had similar issues with Oracle. Fucking views. More trouble than they're worth.
Agreed.
-
-
Status: Possibly just found a highly elusive bug thats been a problem for weeks.
Bug summary: I am an idiot.
-
Fuck faxes in 20-fucking-15!
I agree. Fuck faxes. I could add another item to the things I wish I could say to clients topic.
"Faxing is not working."
"It is 2015, not 1970, email the fucking forms...."
-
email the fucking forms....
Expects an email with an attachment of a hand filled printout that was scanned in again.
Sadly no wooden table ...
-
Status: tired, grumpy and cold, although not as cold as yesterday.... and i have a meeting this morning! a long one....
with luck i'll manage to avoid a RGE.
-
I volunteered to look at some SQL (T-SQL) that's causing performance problems. First view I looked at referenced another view. That queried two other views. The first of those has a view in its definition...
At 4 levels deep, I gave up and started looking for something simpler to start on
-
Views all the way down!
I tend to take the approach that if you need to join two (or more) views together then that's not the right way to do it.
Views referenced inside another view is just a big fat
-
Views referenced inside another view is just a big fat
i can out do you on that one.
when i started here i got handed a query to make performant. i spent about ten minutes looking at it before tearing it us and telling my coworker to implement it as a stored procedure.
why? because the fucking view was recursive!
-
why? because the fucking view was recursive!
You mean a view that referenced itself?
How can you even define one of those?!
-
through one level of indirection.
View A references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A.... you get the picture.
-
-
yep. i refused to untangle that in SQL. so we wrote a sproc that gets denormalized data (without the recursion) and then the C# code turns it into the tree structure it wants before handing it off to the view layer.
-
You mean a view that referenced itself?
How can you even define one of those?!You make it @loopback0 on itself.
badum-tssh
-
-
You make it @loopback0 on itself.
@PJH, we need a rotten tomatoes emoji to throw at people who tell jokes like this. ;-)
-
View A references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A which references View B which references View A.... you get the picture.
Yes. I do.
-
Status: …and back into the 5%
-
maybe once (if) the emoji upload screen starts working again for us.
-
@PJH, we need a rotten tomatoes emoji to throw at people who tell jokes like this
Or a rotten tomato badger.
-
Or a rotten tomato badger.
What's next? @Groaner complaining that I stole his shtick?
-
Tleilaxu
Googling...... oh, yeah, this is certainly part of where it starts to fall apart for me...
-
Googling...... oh, yeah, this is certainly part of where it starts to fall apart for me...
They get a lot more interesting (and critical to the story) later on, but not terribly consistent.
-
@PJH, we need a rotten tomatoes emoji to throw at people who tell jokes like this. ;-)
I get the feeling I'd receive quite a few of those…
@loopback0 said:Or a rotten tomato badger.
And those…
-
Every now and then I'll try and tune an octave up accidentally. Things don't go well for obvious reasons.
Also, MFW people say yesterday wasn't a holiday :3
-
Fuck faxes in 20-fucking-15!
Fuck not e-filing in 2015?Wait... e-file isn't literally digital fax is it?I read faxes as taxes, inb4 flag.
-
-
necessary though, although if govm't was smarter with the money and didn't spend $50k on hammers that sell for $5 at home depot we wouldn't need to have as much of it.
-
Use your budget or lose it amiright?
-
Use your budget or lose it amiright?
as the one paying their budget i'd prefer if they lose it. and no i'm not joking about the $50k hammer. they really have bought such things.
-
I agree, but they aren't going to do that.
-
"... the cleavage of knowledge...".
I think they mean "knowledge gap", but I would like to rest my head there for a while anyway.
-
I agree, but they aren't going to do that.
not without some massive civil uprising, which depending on which side of the aisle you ask (and whether they are currently in charge) is either just a few years away unless they get the majority of the seats or is never going to happen unless they lose the majority of seats
-
necessary though, although if govm't was smarter with the money and didn't spend $50k on hammers that sell for $5 at home depot we wouldn't need to have as much of it.
That's nothing: read up on UK MPs' expenses claims.
No, I am not kidding.
-
not sure what a duck island is (and google suggests either an orgy or a literal island) so i assume that it's usually a lot less expensive?
-
I read faxes as taxes, inb4 flag.
I did, too, and I just sent a fax about taxes. My mortgage company hasn't been paying local property taxes like they're supposed to, and a fax is apparently the only way to properly notify them about it.
-
not sure what a duck island is (and google suggests either an orgy or a literal island) so i assume that it's usually a lot less expensive?
It's not so much how much it costs, but that it was claimed on expenses.UK MPs earn about £67k a year (paid by the taxpayer); to then claim luxuries like duck islands on expenses (also paid by the taxpayer)… well, that's just being a total shit.
-
Literally an island for ducks. Claimed on expenses, because it's obviously very important for the job
-
Status: 100% attendance badger today
-
Literally an island for ducks
huh.... okay then.
It's not so much how much it costs, but that it was claimed on expenses.
oooooh... we're talking about Theft as a Servant or Embezzling or something like that.