Congratulations to those who reach this point. YOU HAVE REACHED 20% of the course. AND FROM THE PARETO MODEL, YOU HAVE NOW 80% of the most used stuff in practical life. Keep going on! your next goal is 40% of this course!
I don't think that's tenable. It would essentially mean blocking the second query until the first query is finished, it seems trivial because of the use case, but for a more complex query you would not want to make a second query wait.
@@Aditya-ne4lk right. And with the LIMIT on the AVG it would *have* to be a SUM that started from page0. While instead a SUM that started elsewhere could be running, which at no point in its run would hold the correct value. However, if there *is* a SUM running from page0, and it scanned less than 100 rows so far, that would be insane work saving.
Congratulations to those who reach this point.
YOU HAVE REACHED 20% of the course.
AND FROM THE PARETO MODEL, YOU HAVE NOW 80% of the most used stuff in practical life.
Keep going on! your next goal is 40% of this course!
44:20 isn't AVG(val) just SUM(val)/COUNT?
Can't it just wait for the sum to finish and divide by the count, possibly cached from some other query?
I don't think that's tenable. It would essentially mean blocking the second query until the first query is finished, it seems trivial because of the use case, but for a more complex query you would not want to make a second query wait.
@@Aditya-ne4lk right. And with the LIMIT on the AVG it would *have* to be a SUM that started from page0.
While instead a SUM that started elsewhere could be running, which at no point in its run would hold the correct value.
However, if there *is* a SUM running from page0, and it scanned less than 100 rows so far, that would be insane work saving.
Omg Andrew Crotty is so handsome I fell in love with him 😘😘😘😘😘😘
I paused and googled why someone would say latch vs lock right before the slide switched T_T