issue_comments
7 rows where issue = 707944044 and "updated_at" is on date 2020-09-24
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 698180113 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698180113 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4MDExMw== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T07:53:03Z | 2020-09-24T07:53:03Z | OWNER | This could do with a little bit more testing - I'm worried there may be column or table name edge cases that are not covered yet. I also need to remove the progress bar code since that no longer makes sense for this implementation. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698180705 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698180705 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4MDcwNQ== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T07:54:10Z | 2020-09-24T07:54:10Z | OWNER | After running through the steps in https://simonwillison.net/2020/Sep/23/sqlite-utils-extract/ I get a table that looks like this: <img width="1699" alt="salaries__salaries__683_558_rows" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9599/94116875-666b8900-fe00-11ea-9e97-2b9ccbfeae29.png"> The foreign key columns are all at the end of the table. It would be nicer if they were arranged in the same order as the columns they replaced. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698181478 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698181478 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4MTQ3OA== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T07:55:45Z | 2020-09-24T07:55:45Z | OWNER | `import functools` is no longer needed. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698182037 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698182037 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4MjAzNw== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T07:56:50Z | 2020-09-24T07:56:50Z | OWNER | I could also be a bit smarter about transaction handling. I think it may be possible to run this entire operation in a single transaction now. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698182656 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698182656 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4MjY1Ng== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T07:58:08Z | 2020-09-24T07:58:08Z | OWNER | The way the lookup table works here differs from the previous implementation. In the previous implementation the usage of `.lookup()` meant that an existing table would be modified to fit the new purpose. That no longer happens in this version. Need to make a design decision about how this should work. It should definitely be possible to use an existing lookup table - imagine a database where several tables have a "Departments" column and we want to extract all of those values out to a single shared "Departments" table. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698184166 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698184166 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODE4NDE2Ng== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T08:01:07Z | 2020-09-24T08:01:07Z | OWNER | I may revert the now unnecessary undocumented tweaks to the `.update()` method made in 66d506587eba9f0715267d6560b97c1fa44cc781 as well. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 | |
| 698400790 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/174#issuecomment-698400790 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/174 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY5ODQwMDc5MA== | simonw 9599 | 2020-09-24T14:59:50Z | 2020-09-24T14:59:50Z | OWNER | For reusing the lookup table: I'm going to raise an error if a lookup table exists but without the correct columns. The caller can then add those columns and try again. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Much, much faster extract() implementation 707944044 |
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]);