Create join tables for less well defined fields. #522
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 2 commits
May 23, 2017 14:40
|
Once again, I can't seem to tag any reviewers - so can you take a look at this when you get a chance, @harrisj ? Thanks! |
|
LGTM! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
So as you alluded to in the last PR for this @harrisj - I was using a single year of a partitioned count table to get the distinct values of certain fields that are not a distinct entity within the CDE. (sex_code, age_num, year, etc.) .
Problem: Even the single year partitions are wayyyyyy to large to use a SELECT DISTINCT ... on.
Proposed Solution: So I created views that only contain these distinct values. Then all the queries can join using these tables. End result = Much faster queries (and hopefully no more timed out requests).