isn't id better to count? since it's non nullable e usually its the primary key witch makes guaranties the index?
I'm still learn, so i'm sorry if that makes no sense
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Obsolete issue, closing
...and the language is?
If all the people use C# instead of assembler, then programming will cease to be programming.
beautiful, of course, but if all the time using system libraries, then programming will cease to be programming.
Fixed
Generally agreed, although shouldn't a database's query analyzer be clever enough to skip selecting any column from this subquery (because it is not actually of any use)?
This is a beginner kata.
They are semantically equivalent I think.
Exactly, SELECT 1 will run much faster than SELECT *
SELECT 1
SELECT *
Added an example to the description. Does it help?
No problem.
Could you paste your solution here so I can take a look?
Loading collection data...
isn't id better to count? since it's non nullable e usually its the primary key witch makes guaranties the index?
I'm still learn, so i'm sorry if that makes no sense
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Obsolete issue, closing
...and the language is?
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
If all the people use C# instead of assembler, then programming will cease to be programming.
beautiful, of course, but if all the time using system libraries, then programming will cease to be programming.
Fixed
Generally agreed, although shouldn't a database's query analyzer be clever enough to skip selecting any column from this subquery (because it is not actually of any use)?
This is a beginner kata.
They are semantically equivalent I think.
Exactly,
SELECT 1will run much faster thanSELECT *Added an example to the description. Does it help?
No problem.
Could you paste your solution here so I can take a look?