do I need to do (((a FOJ b) FOJ c) FOJ d) and coalesce the key fields in each ()? or will it just work if I do a FOJ b on a.x = b.x FOJ c on a.x = c.x etc?
So in order to include all of a and b and c, you need to cross join a and b as t and then cross join t and c, etc. At least, I'm pretty sure that's how I would do it in SQL server.
@KitFox yeah the more I think about it the more this looks like it will be extremely annoying to write. mainly on account of the sheer quantity of tables and subqueries in this query.
In essence: at one point in time someone decided that it'd be nice if a single reporting table would contain all the data for about 20 reports. I don't have time to break it up into 20 tables, but I need to fix a serious data-population bug in this reporting table, so I am rewriting how the table is populated.
A stones throw is described as approximately 20 to 25 feet.
Does it make sense to describe double that distance as "two stones throws away" or would I have to use some other unit?
See also this question also.
@KitFox I have a table query A and a query B and they return data for, say, a given user with a given product in a given day. Only sometimes query A has values in time T and query B doesn't, or Product P has values in B and not in A, or whatever.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 So you want to stitch all the tables together and return all the data, regardless of whether it is matched (except, of course, joining it when it needs joining).
Views won't really change what's happening though, so I'll just see how it works at first, and then ask the DBA if views will help or hurt performance.
Every culture gives the names of its heros and celebrated historical figures to its children. I doubt that many people would argue that one of the most celebrated historical figures in Christian culture is Jesus of Nazrath, however I know no English native speakers with this name. Contrast to the...
The comments in an older question of mine on E.S.E leave an issue unresolved: How does one call the situation in which a taboo concept is referred to as being a specific case of a more general nonvulgar concept? Please see the linked question for an example usage, as it is quite the example that ...
Is there a term for using a word that's often a euphemism to mean exactly what the word means?
For example, in Terry Pratchett's Discworld, what would the act of using the word "seamstress" to refer to someone who actually mends clothes, rather than someone who is a prostitute?
I've never had a theme for mine because we always had so many existing ones to merge into the household... always named 'em for some characteristic of themselves or how they were acquired
In this sentence:
The only exception are questions that are narrow enough that they can
be reasonably answered definitively with one or two possible
solutions.
Should it be "The only exception is" because "exception" is singular, or "The only exception are" because "questions" is plural?
My fish's native habitat is rice fields.
My fish's native habitat are rice fields.
I'm pretty sure the first is correct, since 'is' modifies 'habitat,' but it still sounds weird...
Oh, another kid story: My daughter was watching TV, when my son walked in and stood in front of her. She said "I can't see, J-!" so he turned to her, pointed to himself, and said "J_ right here!"
It was Spontaneous, so I didn't get to actually even watch my judges to see how they were doing. But the group my husband was with, he said they were good and were having fun, and the other had someone slightly experienced, and they had one team they nominated for an OMER award.
Also, the new judges always score so much more leniently than those of us who competed in the past or are experienced, but that's ok since scores get averaged and then normalized. And especially ok for Spontaneous since they don't get a raw score scoresheet & raw scores don't mean as much there.
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Hahaha. That's great. My youngest has been having lots of fun with us and naming people. Pointing at Daddy, "There's F-!" He'll shake his head, say "No no no," then point at himself and say what I think is supposed to be his name.
@KitFox Oh, and the fishing lure earrings worked well to put people at ease at check-in. Kids loved them when they saw me. They were like "Your earrings are so cool!"
@MrShinyandNew安宇 Odyssey of the Mind, a creative problem-solving competition - I was helping run the part that's solving a problem the team has never seen before, on the spot; they also compete in another problem that they have been working on for a long time (months usually) and have 8 minutes to present that solution.
So then a few minutes later, my son had to back up out of the safety zone, and he said "damn it! oh...uh...I mean, is that the one that is OK to say, Daddy?"
I wish I could remember what he used to say. It was something like "I am kidding you" except that it was something that really for sure wasn't transitive.
I would definitely, in my normal speech, use a different verb in that expression, like I was teasing you or I was kidding you or not use it transitively, like I was just joking or I was just kidding around
It doesn't seem weird to me to use kidding like that the same way as joking, hmm
Maybe transitive joking is regional or fading out of use? The example in the dictionary - the comedian joked coins from the audience - makes sense to me and I would accept it if I read it in a book, but I wouldn't expect someone I grew up with to say it either, I think (now I'm not sure either).
It always used to bug me that the Rrroll up the rim to win contest was always at the same time as Lent, because I often gave up donuts/sweets/deserts for Lent. Now that I'm areligious that isn't a problem anymore.