JOINs are almost universally explained with Venn diagrams, but this isn’t the best way. Venn diagrams don’t explain how JOINs are made - they’re an abstract visual analogy for what JOINs look like on completion - therefore almost entirely useless, if not misleading. 1/2
-
-
Interesting - I also found the Venn approach actively confusing. I guess it may depend whether you need/want to know how something works rather than what works… I am thinking about writing about this in more detail if ever I get around to blogging
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting thread, I just read some of it. They are arguing about whether or not the diagrams are helpful. To me the difference between the two approaches isn’t about what helps so much as what one (as a SQL user) wants to know, and why. >
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think many people would rather just know enough to mostly make something work, I may be anomalous in wanting to know how things work in languages I’m using.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I did like this animated explanation that was posted somewhere in that HN argument:https://www.zmwolski.com/sql-joins-explained-visually …
-
I will check that animation out later. Currently in an Apple Store, took my phone in for a new battery and it came back with the home button not working
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.