issue_comments

Table actions

10 rows where issue = 346027040

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

id ▼ html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions issue performed_via_github_app
409087871 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-409087871 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQwOTA4Nzg3MQ== simonw 9599 2018-07-31T04:06:22Z 2018-07-31T04:06:22Z OWNER I started playing with this in the `m2m` branch - work so far: https://github.com/simonw/datasette/compare/295d005ca48747faf046ed30c3c61e7563c61ed2...af4ce463e7518f9d7828b846efd5b528a1905eca Here's a demo: https://datasette-m2m-work-in-progress.now.sh/russian-ads-e8e09e2/ads?_m2m_ad_targets__target_id=ec3ac&_m2m_ad_targets__target_id=e128e {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495058622 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495058622 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA1ODYyMg== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T03:58:58Z 2019-05-23T03:58:58Z OWNER So the design I have so far is: `?_m2m_linktablename__linktablecolumn=value` I'm concerned that this doesn't take tables or columns with `__` in their name into account. Does that matter? Could I support this without them? {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495058828 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495058828 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA1ODgyOA== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T04:00:27Z 2019-05-23T04:00:27Z OWNER The alternative would be to use JSON: `?_m2m={"table":"ad_targets","column":"target_id","value":"ec3ac"}` {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495058964 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495058964 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA1ODk2NA== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T04:01:17Z 2019-05-23T04:01:17Z OWNER I think I like this better. I don't think `?_m2m=` is the correct name for it though. `?_through={"table":"ad_targets","column":"target_id","value":"ec3ac"}` feels a little more accurate. {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495059236 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495059236 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA1OTIzNg== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T04:03:04Z 2019-05-23T04:03:04Z OWNER This assumes that our current table has a single, unambiguous foreign key relationship with the table indicated by the `?through=` parameter. I think that's reasonable. The JSON format could be extended to allow that side of the relationship to optionally be defined there (if the foreign key relationship is missing). {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495061686 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495061686 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA2MTY4Ng== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T04:21:00Z 2019-05-23T04:21:00Z OWNER Filtering through one table already works - you need to know that table's primary key, then you do `?column_id=pk` against the first table. Filtering through a m2m table will be handled by the new `?_through=` parameter. I'm going to leave out filtering through a second levels of joins for the moment. Potentially that could be added later as some extra complicated JSON. {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495077443 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495077443 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA3NzQ0Mw== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T05:52:52Z 2019-05-23T05:52:52Z OWNER Documentation here: https://datasette.readthedocs.io/en/latest/json_api.html#special-table-arguments {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495077528 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495077528 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA3NzUyOA== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T05:53:20Z 2019-05-23T05:53:20Z OWNER Demo: https://latest.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through={%22table%22:%22roadside_attraction_characteristics%22,%22column%22:%22characteristic_id%22,%22value%22:%221%22} {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495079393 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495079393 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA3OTM5Mw== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T06:02:11Z 2019-05-23T06:02:11Z OWNER I'm re-opening because we need a UI mechanism for deselecting this: <img width="937" alt="fixtures__roadside_attractions__2_rows_where_where_roadside_attraction_characteristics_characteristic_id____1__and_fixtures__roadside_attractions__2_rows_where_w here_roadside_attraction_characteristics_characteristic_id____1_" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9599/58229099-9626f000-7ce5-11e9-84d6-a7077b498599.png"> {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  
495079705 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/355#issuecomment-495079705 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/355 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ5NTA3OTcwNQ== simonw 9599 2019-05-23T06:03:40Z 2019-05-23T06:04:03Z OWNER I think an approach similar to how `?_where=` works would do the job here. Can address this feedback from @psychemedia while I'm at it: https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/429#issuecomment-483202658 ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82988/56127017-2bf78e80-5f74-11e9-9120-9393eb5d4988.png) {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} Table view should support filtering via many-to-many relationships 346027040  

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
                ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
                ON [issue_comments] ([user]);