issue_comments

Table actions

1 row where issue = 517338735 and user = 4605410 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

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

user 1

  • k-a-mendoza · 1 ✖

issue 1

  • Need documentation on sparse / cupy integration · 1 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
550471849 https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/3484#issuecomment-550471849 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/3484 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU1MDQ3MTg0OQ== k-a-mendoza 4605410 2019-11-06T19:48:17Z 2019-11-06T19:48:17Z NONE

@friedrichknuth One of my motivations behind exploring sparse DataArray backends is in reducing the memory footprint during merge operations. Consider the following:

One can imagine many such merge operations producing a lot of effectively empty indices. While sparse backed arrays might have the ability to condense these empty indices in memory, it seems like xarray sparse merging isnt quite compatible yet.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   Need documentation on sparse / cupy integration 517338735

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,
   [performed_via_github_app] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
    ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
    ON [issue_comments] ([user]);