639 karma · joined September 8, 2013
The SQL standard does not specify how many times a subquery must or can be run. In this case, Postgres is free to run the uncorrelated subquery many times. Unfortunately, the subquery result is not idempotent.
The real solution is not to rely on the optimizer for the correctness of your query. The query should be logically correct, irrespective of the query plan, right? The correct solution would be to ensure that the subquery runs only once, using a materialized cte or temp table. Do not base your "solution" on the discovery that for this particular version of Postgres, the planner runs this type of subquery once for the '=' operator and multiple times for 'IN'.
Why hide a malicious chip in a cable with display -- why not in one without a display? Wouldn't that be more, uh, malicious?
Uh, pretty sure the Bangalore data center is not in Mumbai.
They do. F2FS [1] does. There were attempts to add them to xfs/ext4 too, but they petered out, probably because of lack of interest.
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/f2fs.html
That's a bold claim. Any pointers to the research behind this?
go run -gcflags=-G=3 foo.goFollow Rocky Linux's path and start a community fork!
It is indeed possible to add build constraints to .go files to have them included for compilation only on specified minimum versions of Go, see [1]
When UK went in to lockdown, it had 6700 cases. (23rd March) [2]
When India went in to lockdown, it had 657 cases. (25th March) [2]
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/20/politics/new-york-workfor... [2] https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html
FWIW, India did implement a stronger lockdown much earlier on in the curve than other countries. State and federal authorities went lock-step in their actions, and with consistent messaging. Police enforced the lockdown at times even brutally, getting the point across to the general public. Indians watched UK and US struggle through a denial and late response in disbelief, like watching a car crash in slow motion.
Really? The article says: "The ads were limited in size and reach, with each costing under $100, according to disclosure details listed online." Each ad was "under $100," and there are no details as to the exact extent of reach. The total spend could have easily been a few hundred grand.