issue_comments: 779416619
This data as json
| html_url | issue_url | id | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/147#issuecomment-779416619 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/147 | 779416619 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDc3OTQxNjYxOQ== | 9599 | 2021-02-15T19:40:57Z | 2021-02-15T21:27:55Z | OWNER | Tried this experiment (not proper binary search, it only searches downwards): ```python import sqlite3 db = sqlite3.connect(":memory:") def tryit(n): sql = "select 1 where 1 in ({})".format(", ".join("?" for i in range(n))) db.execute(sql, [0 for i in range(n)]) def find_limit(min=0, max=5_000_000): value = max while True: print('Trying', value) try: tryit(value) return value except: value = value // 2 ``` Running `find_limit()` with those default parameters takes about 1.47s on my laptop: ``` In [9]: %timeit find_limit() Trying 5000000 Trying 2500000... 1.47 s ± 28 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each) ``` Interestingly the value it suggested was 156250 - suggesting that the macOS `sqlite3` binary with a 500,000 limit isn't the same as whatever my Python is using here. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 688670158 |