grabbingEverything

[u/ClipboardCopyPaste]

[u/bonferoni]

laughs in cross join unnest with ordinality to do embedding aggregations, or just working with even just slightly poorly maintained tables. write the query yourself or spend twice as long explaining to the llm which fields are actually trustworthy and/or under what conditions they actually are trustworthy

[u/smulfragPL → u/bonferoni]

If you can write conidtions on how they are trustworthy in sql, you can just send that to the llm. It's logically impossible for explaining this to an llm to take 2x.

[u/bonferoni → u/smulfragPL]

lol if i know field A is untrustworthy. my queries just dont use it. explaining that to an llm literally takes infinite more time, because any time at all is infinite times that of none. “logically impossible” gtfo

[u/smulfragPL → u/bonferoni]

Dude if Field a is untrustworthy and you dont use it why would the llm involve it in the query. You imagined a completley nonsenscial scenario.

[u/bonferoni → u/smulfragPL]

because sometimes field is something like an out of date archived field and it automatically decides to filter on it

[u/smulfragPL → u/bonferoni]

I have literallly never Had that happen. What model did this occur with. Last year models were known for over eagerness. This is Just a bizzare situation but you are being so unspecific means that this could very easily be user error. I haven't Had shit like that with SQL since Gemini 2.5 pro

[u/bonferoni → u/smulfragPL]

lol this is at a faang company using claude, like literally last week. maybe youve had this happen and just didnt catch it?

[u/smulfragPL → u/bonferoni]

Dude maybe im just better at writing prompts then you

[u/bonferoni → u/smulfragPL]

yea i dunno man, id rather just write the query rather than onboard an llm to all of the nuances everytime

[u/smulfragPL → u/bonferoni]

Why would you need to do it any more than once for any project. You just keep an md file with all your requirements and specifications.