issue_comments
10 rows where issue = 449565204
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 507050894 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507050894 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MDg5NA== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T16:51:39Z | 2019-06-30T16:55:16Z | OWNER | One option: db.insert_m2m("dogs", 1, "breeds", 3) This would create the missing m2m table if it did not already exist, and call it `dogs_breeds`. You can pass an optional `m2m_table=` argument to specify the table name: db.insert_m2m("dogs", 1, "breeds", 3, m2m_table="dog_m2m_breeds") Maybe allow passing extra key/value pairs that will be inserted into the m2m table? db.insert_m2m("dogs", 1, "breeds", 3, m2m_extra={"classified_on_date": "2019-04-01"}) Could even accept `alter=True` to cause the m2m table to be automatically altered to fit any `m2m_extra=` columns that do not already exist. It would be nice if there was a `table.*` method for this which allowed you to send three arguments rather than four. Maybe something like this: db["dogs"].insert_m2m(1, "breeds", 3) It's a bit confusing them both having the same method name though. Also calling it `insert_m2m` here is odd because you're not inserting into the `dogs` table. Maybe this instead? db["dogs"].m2m(1, "breeds", 3) | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507051067 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507051067 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MTA2Nw== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T16:54:08Z | 2019-06-30T16:59:05Z | OWNER | There could be a version of this which inserts the related record into the other table if it is missing, but reuses it if it's already there. That might look like this: db["events"].m2m(3, "venues", { "id": 4, "venue_name": "Blah", "latitude": 37.77 "longitude": 122.42 }, pk="id") Since this is doing an `.upsert()` against `venues`, the `.m2m()` method could accept all of the other arguments to `.upsert()` - probably `pk=`, `column_order=` and `ignore=True` as well (actually borrowed from `.insert(...)`, it would mean don't update this row if you find it). | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507051516 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507051516 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MTUxNg== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T17:01:26Z | 2019-06-30T17:03:16Z | OWNER | Question: do I set a compound primary key on `(event_id, venue_id)` or do I add an auto-incrementing surrogate key as well? I'm leaning towards compound primary key. Maybe that's the default and there's an option for including a regular incrementing primary key. ``` db["events"].m2m(3, "venues", { "id": 4, "venue_name": "Blah", "latitude": 37.77 "longitude": 122.42 }, pk="id", m2m_surrogate_id=True) ``` If you use `m2m_surrogate_id` I'll still make sure to set up a unique constraint on `(event_id, venue_id)` | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507051825 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507051825 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MTgyNQ== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T17:06:29Z | 2019-06-30T17:06:29Z | OWNER | For this method: ```python db["events"].m2m(3, "venues", { "id": 4, "venue_name": "Blah", "latitude": 37.77 "longitude": 122.42 }, pk="id") ``` Let's say that the first argument is allowed to be either a string/integer representing a primary key, OR it can be a full row record (a dictionary) which will have its primary key automatically extracted based on the table definition. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507052051 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507052051 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MjA1MQ== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T17:09:51Z | 2019-06-30T17:15:09Z | OWNER | Maybe there's a case where we want to be able to insert a row AND add its m2m records in a single operation? Could look something like this: ```python db["events"].insert({ "id": 1, "title": "Some event" }, m2m={ "venues": { "id": 4, "venue_name": "Blah", "latitude": 37.77 "longitude": 122.42 } }) ``` The `venues` key in that dictionary could be a single dictionary or a list of dictionary. I'm not sure about this though. If the `m2m=` argument causes the creation of the `venues` table, how would we pass in extra creation options like `pk=` for that table? Maybe some complex nested function mechanism like this? ```python db["events"].insert({ "id": 1, "title": "Some event" }, m2m=[db["venues"].upsert({ "id": 4, "venue_name": "Blah", "latitude": 37.77 "longitude": 122.42 }, pk="id")] }) ``` This would require having `.insert()` and friends return a more interesting object than they do at the moment. They currently return `self` to support chaining. Changing this would be a backwards-incompatible change and hence would require a major version bump... _unless_ they continued to return `self` but remembered the last inserted record in a way that could be handled by that `m2m=` argument. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507053558 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507053558 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MzU1OA== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T17:34:29Z | 2019-06-30T17:34:29Z | OWNER | Or... how about we use chaining like this: ```python db["events"].insert({...}, pk="id").m2m("venues", {...}, pk="id") ``` This makes me think that maybe there should be some kind of mechanism for saying "I'd should always be treated as a primary key". Maybe as an argument passed to the `Database` constructor. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507053731 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507053731 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1MzczMQ== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T17:37:33Z | 2019-06-30T17:37:33Z | OWNER | Implementing the `table.m2m()` method to have an optional _first_ argument (optional in that if it's in a chained operation it uses the last inserted thing) could be tricky. How to tell the difference between the two uses? A different method name would be better. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 507055345 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-507055345 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUwNzA1NTM0NQ== | simonw 9599 | 2019-06-30T18:02:25Z | 2019-06-30T18:02:33Z | OWNER | I have a solution. If I introduce a `db[table_name].update(row_pk, {...})` method I can use that method without the dictionary argument to select a specific row as the "currently editing / last inserted" row in the table context. Then I can support the following: ```python db["events"].update(3).m2m("venues", {...}, pk="id") ``` This means that the `table.m2m()` method will only work in the context of a chain, and will throw an error if you attempt to call it without first using `.insert()` or `.update()` to select a record that you will be manipulating first. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 517927854 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-517927854 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxNzkyNzg1NA== | simonw 9599 | 2019-08-03T14:17:12Z | 2019-08-03T14:17:12Z | OWNER | It would be neat if this could interact with the lookup table mechanism introduced in #44 Maybe like this: ```python table.insert({"name": "Barry"}).m2m("tags", lookup={"tag": "Coworker"}) ``` | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 | |
| 517971623 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23#issuecomment-517971623 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/23 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxNzk3MTYyMw== | simonw 9599 | 2019-08-04T03:54:58Z | 2019-08-04T03:54:58Z | OWNER | Released in version 1.9. Documentation is here: https://sqlite-utils.readthedocs.io/en/stable/python-api.html#working-with-many-to-many-relationships | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntactic sugar for creating m2m records 449565204 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
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]);