relationships unclear in case 2 #23
Comments
|
I think you mean case 3 |
|
We also found the column names ambiguous. May I suggest a "documentation" page that further defines the columns in the schema? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hi- love this, excellent fun- but beat my head against case 2 for a bit because I misunderstood how hotel_checkins and surveillance_records were linked. The obvious interpretation (to me at least) is that you would
JOIN surveillance_records ON hotel_checkin_id = hotel_checkins.id—that is, that the entries in the surveillance records table associated with a given checkin_id would be observations about that checkin and the behavior of the person who checked in then.I guess actually you're supposed to join on the person_id, and the hotel_checkin_id for a given surveillance record is...something else? The checkin id for the person who made the observation maybe? It's not at all clear to me. But, I had to brute force the case and then backsolve to figure out what had even gone wrong, because trying to join on the checkin id doesn't pull up anything relevant.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: