issue_comments: 864417493
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/285#issuecomment-864417493 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/285 | 864417493 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg2NDQxNzQ5Mw== | 9599 | 2021-06-19T15:00:43Z | 2021-06-19T15:00:43Z | OWNER | I have to be careful about the language I use here. Here's the official definition: https://www.sqlite.org/rowidtable.html > A "rowid table" is any table in an SQLite schema that > > - is *not* a [virtual table](https://www.sqlite.org/vtab.html), and > - is *not* a [WITHOUT ROWID](https://www.sqlite.org/withoutrowid.html) table. > > Most tables in a typical SQLite database schema are rowid tables. > > Rowid tables are distinguished by the fact that they all have a unique, non-NULL, signed 64-bit integer [rowid](https://www.sqlite.org/lang_createtable.html#rowid) that is used as the access key for the data in the underlying [B-tree](https://www.sqlite.org/fileformat2.html#btree) storage engine. So it's not correct to call a table a "rowid table" only if it is missing its own primary keys. Maybe `table.has_rowid` is the right language to use here? No, that's no good - because tables with their own primary keys usually also have a rowid. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 925410305 |