You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The query summary of a task stores the query IDs in the format <querysource-hashcode>;<query-id-inside-of-querysource>. which
may working with the file a bit more difficult. The hashcode should be instead written in a separate column.
Do you have a example where it is specifically problematic? Because, on the other hand, this makes queryID a unique key for queries even if you have results from different sources in one CSV fil.
Not a specific case, but it just seemed to make more sense to me to split up the query id and the hash of the query-source (also in terms of normalising the table). You could still use both values as the key, as opposed to solely using the queryID row. It was just some random thing that I noticed, I don't know if it is really an issue.
queryID should generally be replaced with query-index together with, where necessary source-hash. query-hash is an additional information for easier matching of queries within a source or across sources.
The query summary of a task stores the query IDs in the format
<querysource-hashcode>;<query-id-inside-of-querysource>
. whichmay working with the file a bit more difficult. The hashcode should be instead written in a separate column.
Example:
should be instead:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: