Databases and SQL: Fix grammar and clarify SQL concepts #29611
Merged
+31
−23
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
The sentence, "If you just do an action on a table without specifying conditions, it will apply to the whole database and you’ll probably break something" mentions that the action is on a table. Hence, it would affect the table, not the whole database.
It's incorrectly referred to as a function, but `HAVING` is a clause.
HAVING is a clause, not a function.
JoshDevHub
requested changes
Apr 15, 2025
Revised explanation to mention that omitting column names is possible but discouraged, without showing an example.
The reference to `HAVING` was recently updated from "function" to "clause" and the id needed updating as well as the knowledge check link.
|
Done. Thank you for the suggestions. Let me know if you think any further modifications are needed. |
JoshDevHub
approved these changes
May 26, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Because
The lesson had some grammar issues and unclear phrasing around certain SQL concepts. These edits aim to improve clarity, accuracy, and readability for learners.
This PR
INSERT INTOstatements*in aggregate functions likeCOUNT(*)vsMAX(*). The "(because how would youMAXa column for "name"?)" part is removed because the issue isn’t really about the name column, but thatMAX(*)doesn't make sense becauseMAXrequires a specific type of columnHAVINGfunction" to the correct term, "HAVINGclause"Issue
Closes #XXXXX
Additional Information
Pull Request Requirements
location of change: brief description of changeformat, e.g.Intro to HTML and CSS lesson: Fix link textBecausesection summarizes the reason for this PRThis PRsection has a bullet point list describing the changes in this PRIssuesection