https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20150
OverlordQ changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20150
--- Comment #4 from OverlordQ 2009-10-25 20:43:59 UTC ---
Then why not use DISTINCT instead of group by?
Although we know the rows are the same, the DB doesn't know that, so saying
group by ls_log_id it goes "Well which log_type should I
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20150
--- Comment #3 from Aaron Schulz 2009-10-25 15:39:53
UTC ---
One log can change several items. If I delete 3 items at once and then view the
logs for those three items I'd expect to see that one log entry once rather
than three times.
-
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20150
--- Comment #2 from OverlordQ 2009-10-25 14:13:46 UTC ---
I'm just wondering why it specifies a group by ls_log_id on the log_search
table since as far as I can tell a new log id is generated for every action so
a group by on that column i
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20150
--- Comment #1 from Aaron Schulz 2009-09-02 01:05:00
UTC ---
Yes, it is needed...though maybe a different way of expressing it would help PG
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are r
