4 ms·
> i think mostly because this is even more complicated than the approach taken I understand that SQL is considered simpler if you have code-golfed it into one
by teachingassist 5y ago
> i think mostly because this is even more complicated than the approach taken
I understand that SQL is considered simpler if you have code-golfed it into one line, but the procedure of simple random sampling is much simpler than generating a 2D map of points and finding the nearest one.
- asddubs 5y agoI guess you have a point there. My gut instinct was that it'd be more complicated to understand/modify but thinking about it a bit more I don't think that's really necessarily the case. And even with much more rows being filtered out than being included in the predicate, it would take looking at the same amount of rows on average (I think) to find the desired amount of results. It might be worse if there's significantly more deleted rows than existing ones, though.