workspace stringclasses 1
value | channel stringclasses 1
value | sentences stringlengths 1 3.93k | ts stringlengths 26 26 | user stringlengths 2 11 | sentence_id stringlengths 44 53 | timestamp float64 1.5B 1.56B | __index_level_0__ int64 0 106k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
pythondev | help | exactly | 2018-01-18T16:55:01.000989 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:55:01.000989 | 1,516,294,501.000989 | 29,824 |
pythondev | help | the difficult part is there is a `unique` constraint in SQL | 2018-01-18T16:55:27.000904 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:55:27.000904 | 1,516,294,527.000904 | 29,825 |
pythondev | help | but its implemented to mean that the value for that column is unique to the entire table | 2018-01-18T16:55:43.001097 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:55:43.001097 | 1,516,294,543.001097 | 29,826 |
pythondev | help | indeed, you kind of want a composite uniqueness | 2018-01-18T16:55:57.000185 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T16:55:57.000185 | 1,516,294,557.000185 | 29,827 |
pythondev | help | thats why you’d have to use whatever DB you’re using to make such a composite unique constraint | 2018-01-18T16:56:06.000285 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:56:06.000285 | 1,516,294,566.000285 | 29,828 |
pythondev | help | :confused: not with sqlalchemy? | 2018-01-18T16:56:17.000394 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T16:56:17.000394 | 1,516,294,577.000394 | 29,829 |
pythondev | help | I think you’re misunderstanding the role between the two | 2018-01-18T16:56:36.000123 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:56:36.000123 | 1,516,294,596.000123 | 29,830 |
pythondev | help | right now, the goal is to develop a schema that fits your data | 2018-01-18T16:56:55.000490 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:56:55.000490 | 1,516,294,615.00049 | 29,831 |
pythondev | help | just a quick check: when we use a foreign key to an id... does that make us be able to refer to the Currency object in "from_currency"? not right? is that why we use `backref`? | 2018-01-18T16:57:01.000478 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T16:57:01.000478 | 1,516,294,621.000478 | 29,832 |
pythondev | help | correct | 2018-01-18T16:57:13.000300 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:57:13.000300 | 1,516,294,633.0003 | 29,833 |
pythondev | help | well I thought that this schema would make enough sense to get started (minus the constraint, but i could live with that detail for now) | 2018-01-18T16:57:50.000262 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T16:57:50.000262 | 1,516,294,670.000262 | 29,834 |
pythondev | help | just that I couldn't get it to work | 2018-01-18T16:57:59.000659 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T16:57:59.000659 | 1,516,294,679.000659 | 29,835 |
pythondev | help | <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10059345/sqlalchemy-unique-across-multiple-columns> | 2018-01-18T16:58:19.000170 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T16:58:19.000170 | 1,516,294,699.00017 | 29,836 |
pythondev | help | do I not need a `relationship`? | 2018-01-18T17:00:26.000284 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:00:26.000284 | 1,516,294,826.000284 | 29,837 |
pythondev | help | on `class Currency` like `relationship('Pair', backref='left', lazy=True)` | 2018-01-18T17:01:04.000877 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:01:04.000877 | 1,516,294,864.000877 | 29,838 |
pythondev | help | <@Floy> could you tell me whats wrong here :slightly_smiling_face: ? | 2018-01-18T17:11:08.000042 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:11:08.000042 | 1,516,295,468.000042 | 29,839 |
pythondev | help | I'm commuting home now, sorry | 2018-01-18T17:13:17.000452 | Floy | pythondev_help_Floy_2018-01-18T17:13:17.000452 | 1,516,295,597.000452 | 29,840 |
pythondev | help | ah no problem :slightly_smiling_face: | 2018-01-18T17:14:19.000123 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:14:19.000123 | 1,516,295,659.000123 | 29,841 |
pythondev | help | <@Davina> just saw your last post, thanks man! | 2018-01-18T17:25:13.000347 | Bella | pythondev_help_Bella_2018-01-18T17:25:13.000347 | 1,516,296,313.000347 | 29,842 |
pythondev | help | <@Stefan> looks like you forgot the code for the relationship in your snippet | 2018-01-18T17:32:49.000191 | Brande | pythondev_help_Brande_2018-01-18T17:32:49.000191 | 1,516,296,769.000191 | 29,843 |
pythondev | help | Yea i'm thinking it is now working | 2018-01-18T17:40:24.000913 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:40:24.000913 | 1,516,297,224.000913 | 29,844 |
pythondev | help | to me it seems a bit silly I have to implement `left_id`... why wouldn't it automagically make this column if we would just define a relationship? to use the primary key of the other table? | 2018-01-18T17:41:31.000287 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:41:31.000287 | 1,516,297,291.000287 | 29,845 |
pythondev | help | yup | 2018-01-18T17:42:17.000800 | Brande | pythondev_help_Brande_2018-01-18T17:42:17.000800 | 1,516,297,337.0008 | 29,846 |
pythondev | help | and for the other question, because how SQL is. you can’t create relationships on something that doesn’t exist, and implicitly creating columns for relationships is yuck | 2018-01-18T17:43:05.000777 | Brande | pythondev_help_Brande_2018-01-18T17:43:05.000777 | 1,516,297,385.000777 | 29,847 |
pythondev | help | `lazy=True`? | 2018-01-18T17:43:26.000631 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:43:26.000631 | 1,516,297,406.000631 | 29,848 |
pythondev | help | I would also like to auto generate some stuff you know | 2018-01-18T17:43:53.000502 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:43:53.000502 | 1,516,297,433.000502 | 29,849 |
pythondev | help | maybe pandas can do it | 2018-01-18T17:44:08.000676 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:44:08.000676 | 1,516,297,448.000676 | 29,850 |
pythondev | help | `pandas.DataFrame.to_sql` | 2018-01-18T17:44:36.001353 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:44:36.001353 | 1,516,297,476.001353 | 29,851 |
pythondev | help | lol | 2018-01-18T17:44:38.001431 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:44:38.001431 | 1,516,297,478.001431 | 29,852 |
pythondev | help | db modeling shouldn’t be done with autogenerated fields other than standard conventions like `created_on` `deleted_on` etc | 2018-01-18T17:45:06.001087 | Brande | pythondev_help_Brande_2018-01-18T17:45:06.001087 | 1,516,297,506.001087 | 29,853 |
pythondev | help | i'd like it to get started though | 2018-01-18T17:45:37.000304 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T17:45:37.000304 | 1,516,297,537.000304 | 29,854 |
pythondev | help | well once you have the model and the implementation in place it’ll be rolling, but good data modeling is a good price to pay up front before it bites you later | 2018-01-18T17:54:30.000374 | Brande | pythondev_help_Brande_2018-01-18T17:54:30.000374 | 1,516,298,070.000374 | 29,855 |
pythondev | help | I did it :slightly_smiling_face: exchanges, pairs and currencies, with many to many and one to many relations | 2018-01-18T18:04:01.000165 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T18:04:01.000165 | 1,516,298,641.000165 | 29,856 |
pythondev | help | hey all - I’m running into a strange issue involving recursion with a sentence tree data structure. | 2018-01-18T19:37:28.000818 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:37:28.000818 | 1,516,304,248.000818 | 29,857 |
pythondev | help | wow that bot is annoying. | 2018-01-18T19:37:40.000452 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:37:40.000452 | 1,516,304,260.000452 | 29,858 |
pythondev | help | I have a list of the form `['(', 'S', '(', 'NP', '(', 'Det', 'the', ')', '(', 'N', 'dog', ')', ')', '(', 'VP', '(', 'V', 'barks', ')', ')', '(', 'Adv', 'loudly', ')', ')']` that I’m parsing using a pretty simple recursiv. function to produce a sentence tree object. | 2018-01-18T19:39:20.001623 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:39:20.001623 | 1,516,304,360.001623 | 29,859 |
pythondev | help | However, I’m getting bizarre results where the child lists always contain themselves and all other children. It’s as though the stack is “leaking”. | 2018-01-18T19:40:22.001298 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:40:22.001298 | 1,516,304,422.001298 | 29,860 |
pythondev | help | This is what the data structure ends up looking like - it’s only supposed to have two layers, the NP layer and its two children: (Det the) and (N dog). | 2018-01-18T19:41:37.000611 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:41:37.000611 | 1,516,304,497.000611 | 29,861 |
pythondev | help | Can anyone help me out? I’m really at the end of my rope here. | 2018-01-18T19:41:56.000443 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:41:56.000443 | 1,516,304,516.000443 | 29,862 |
pythondev | help | hello? is anyone even here? | 2018-01-18T19:46:07.000726 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:46:07.000726 | 1,516,304,767.000726 | 29,863 |
pythondev | help | :wave: | 2018-01-18T19:46:47.000853 | Kathlyn | pythondev_help_Kathlyn_2018-01-18T19:46:47.000853 | 1,516,304,807.000853 | 29,864 |
pythondev | help | hi | 2018-01-18T19:47:51.000418 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:47:51.000418 | 1,516,304,871.000418 | 29,865 |
pythondev | help | so uh, any insights as to why recurson (intentionally misspelling it to avoid the bot) would cause this weird stuff? | 2018-01-18T19:48:56.000178 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:48:56.000178 | 1,516,304,936.000178 | 29,866 |
pythondev | help | <@Tisa> it looks to me like you shouldn't do the internal part like that (double "(") | 2018-01-18T19:54:20.000551 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:54:20.000551 | 1,516,305,260.000551 | 29,867 |
pythondev | help | the “while tokens[j] == ‘(’” part? | 2018-01-18T19:54:37.000912 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:54:37.000912 | 1,516,305,277.000912 | 29,868 |
pythondev | help | yea | 2018-01-18T19:54:44.000631 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:54:44.000631 | 1,516,305,284.000631 | 29,869 |
pythondev | help | what's the example string? | 2018-01-18T19:54:50.000442 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:54:50.000442 | 1,516,305,290.000442 | 29,870 |
pythondev | help | I pasted it above | 2018-01-18T19:55:00.000512 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:55:00.000512 | 1,516,305,300.000512 | 29,871 |
pythondev | help | `['(', 'S', '(', 'NP', '(', 'Det', 'the', ')', '(', 'N', 'dog', ')', ')', '(', 'VP', '(', 'V', 'barks', ')', ')', '(', 'Adv', 'loudly', ')', ')']` | 2018-01-18T19:55:13.000103 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:55:13.000103 | 1,516,305,313.000103 | 29,872 |
pythondev | help | ah, that looked to me like the parsed representation lol | 2018-01-18T19:55:15.000140 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:55:15.000140 | 1,516,305,315.00014 | 29,873 |
pythondev | help | it’s in list form already - so it kind of is. | 2018-01-18T19:55:29.000738 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:55:29.000738 | 1,516,305,329.000738 | 29,874 |
pythondev | help | It’s the tokenized form. | 2018-01-18T19:55:32.000890 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:55:32.000890 | 1,516,305,332.00089 | 29,875 |
pythondev | help | you could also consider writing it in the iterative way when you get stuck on recursion | 2018-01-18T19:55:58.001135 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:55:58.001135 | 1,516,305,358.001135 | 29,876 |
pythondev | help | The problem is, this is for sentence trees. So it’s much easier to write recursively than iteratively… | 2018-01-18T19:56:36.000983 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:56:36.000983 | 1,516,305,396.000983 | 29,877 |
pythondev | help | so i think you will want to just handle it case by case rather than looking ahead? | 2018-01-18T19:56:42.000243 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:56:42.000243 | 1,516,305,402.000243 | 29,878 |
pythondev | help | How do you mean? From what I understand there are two basic cases: we’re at a leaf node or we’re at an internal node. | 2018-01-18T19:57:09.000866 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:57:09.000866 | 1,516,305,429.000866 | 29,879 |
pythondev | help | so don't do anything other than look at the current node | 2018-01-18T19:57:16.000399 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:57:16.000399 | 1,516,305,436.000399 | 29,880 |
pythondev | help | Sure, that’d be nice if I could do it. The problem is - I need to add children to the parent node’s “children” member. | 2018-01-18T19:58:05.000397 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:58:05.000397 | 1,516,305,485.000397 | 29,881 |
pythondev | help | I suppose I could add them to a list and set the parent’s “children” member to it - but that’s still the same general issue. | 2018-01-18T19:58:32.000244 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:58:32.000244 | 1,516,305,512.000244 | 29,882 |
pythondev | help | you need to carry along tree in the algo | 2018-01-18T19:58:47.001005 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T19:58:47.001005 | 1,516,305,527.001005 | 29,883 |
pythondev | help | Why? I’m returning the tree - isn’t that good enough? | 2018-01-18T19:59:35.000784 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:59:35.000784 | 1,516,305,575.000784 | 29,884 |
pythondev | help | I feel like I’m missing something obvious here but I don’t know what it is. | 2018-01-18T19:59:55.000934 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T19:59:55.000934 | 1,516,305,595.000934 | 29,885 |
pythondev | help | Do note that this isn’t a standard Python tree - it’s a custom class. | 2018-01-18T20:01:42.001421 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:01:42.001421 | 1,516,305,702.001421 | 29,886 |
pythondev | help | you sure you don't want to use spacy :stuck_out_tongue:? | 2018-01-18T20:02:05.000087 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:02:05.000087 | 1,516,305,725.000087 | 29,887 |
pythondev | help | I’m using only standard python libs for this - if I could I’d use NLTK and not worry about it. | 2018-01-18T20:02:23.000452 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:02:23.000452 | 1,516,305,743.000452 | 29,888 |
pythondev | help | I stole someone's tree algo to create spacy_api TreeView | 2018-01-18T20:02:25.001416 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:02:25.001416 | 1,516,305,745.001416 | 29,889 |
pythondev | help | This needs to be a custom class anyways since it’s a *sentence tree* not a normal tree. | 2018-01-18T20:02:45.000664 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:02:45.000664 | 1,516,305,765.000664 | 29,890 |
pythondev | help | so the main thing is | 2018-01-18T20:03:00.000006 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:03:00.000006 | 1,516,305,780.000006 | 29,891 |
pythondev | help | I laid down the structure for you | 2018-01-18T20:03:07.001529 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:03:07.001529 | 1,516,305,787.001529 | 29,892 |
pythondev | help | you just need to make tree be your object | 2018-01-18T20:03:16.000010 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:03:16.000010 | 1,516,305,796.00001 | 29,893 |
pythondev | help | and implement `pass` | 2018-01-18T20:03:25.001091 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:03:25.001091 | 1,516,305,805.001091 | 29,894 |
pythondev | help | the recursion should be taken care of if im not mistaken | 2018-01-18T20:03:32.000966 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:03:32.000966 | 1,516,305,812.000966 | 29,895 |
pythondev | help | OK. And why would we want to do parse tokens=tokens[1:] instead of moving forwards to a new ( symbol? | 2018-01-18T20:04:06.001060 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:04:06.001060 | 1,516,305,846.00106 | 29,896 |
pythondev | help | I actually think this is easier done using iteration but that's my feeling | 2018-01-18T20:04:46.000669 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:04:46.000669 | 1,516,305,886.000669 | 29,897 |
pythondev | help | well you could, but that's just an optimization | 2018-01-18T20:05:03.000151 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:05:03.000151 | 1,516,305,903.000151 | 29,898 |
pythondev | help | OK. I’ll take a look at that code and try to implement it with my class. | 2018-01-18T20:05:56.000884 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:05:56.000884 | 1,516,305,956.000884 | 29,899 |
pythondev | help | I feel like you might need to add an extra variable | 2018-01-18T20:06:38.000867 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:06:38.000867 | 1,516,305,998.000867 | 29,900 |
pythondev | help | something like a pointer | 2018-01-18T20:06:46.000499 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:06:46.000499 | 1,516,306,006.000499 | 29,901 |
pythondev | help | to a current node | 2018-01-18T20:06:55.000661 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:06:55.000661 | 1,516,306,015.000661 | 29,902 |
pythondev | help | well actually | 2018-01-18T20:07:36.001246 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:07:36.001246 | 1,516,306,056.001246 | 29,903 |
pythondev | help | I highly doubt that’s the case. I’ve implemented something similar before and it definitely didn’t need a node pointer. | 2018-01-18T20:07:41.001068 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:07:41.001068 | 1,516,306,061.001068 | 29,904 |
pythondev | help | Might need a “start index” variable but that’s what “start” was supposed to do. | 2018-01-18T20:08:14.000558 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:08:14.000558 | 1,516,306,094.000558 | 29,905 |
pythondev | help | ahh, nvm - just using a separate list instead of assigning directly to “children” fixed it for some godforsaken reason | 2018-01-18T20:11:16.000345 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:11:16.000345 | 1,516,306,276.000345 | 29,906 |
pythondev | help | this is one messed up structure lol | 2018-01-18T20:14:37.001060 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:14:37.001060 | 1,516,306,477.00106 | 29,907 |
pythondev | help | I have no idea what the heck is going on there, for some reason the children member (which is just a simple list) persists through all the instances of the freakin’ object in that recursive function | 2018-01-18T20:15:51.000688 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:15:51.000688 | 1,516,306,551.000688 | 29,908 |
pythondev | help | did you do like | 2018-01-18T20:16:06.000244 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:06.000244 | 1,516,306,566.000244 | 29,909 |
pythondev | help | class A(): | 2018-01-18T20:16:09.001109 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:09.001109 | 1,516,306,569.001109 | 29,910 |
pythondev | help | a = 1 | 2018-01-18T20:16:13.000478 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:13.000478 | 1,516,306,573.000478 | 29,911 |
pythondev | help | ugh | 2018-01-18T20:16:17.001418 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:17.001418 | 1,516,306,577.001418 | 29,912 |
pythondev | help | I just made a new list and appended to it, then set children to that list | 2018-01-18T20:16:28.000474 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:16:28.000474 | 1,516,306,588.000474 | 29,913 |
pythondev | help | class A():
my_list = [] | 2018-01-18T20:16:30.000511 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:30.000511 | 1,516,306,590.000511 | 29,914 |
pythondev | help | and it works now | 2018-01-18T20:16:30.000552 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:16:30.000552 | 1,516,306,590.000552 | 29,915 |
pythondev | help | like that it is a class variable | 2018-01-18T20:16:37.001456 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:37.001456 | 1,516,306,597.001456 | 29,916 |
pythondev | help | so it will "leak" as you call it | 2018-01-18T20:16:41.000733 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:41.000733 | 1,516,306,601.000733 | 29,917 |
pythondev | help | class A():
def __init__(self):
my_list = [] | 2018-01-18T20:16:54.000949 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:54.000949 | 1,516,306,614.000949 | 29,918 |
pythondev | help | then it won't leak | 2018-01-18T20:16:57.000791 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:16:57.000791 | 1,516,306,617.000791 | 29,919 |
pythondev | help | I did __init__(self, children=[]) | 2018-01-18T20:17:17.000842 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:17:17.000842 | 1,516,306,637.000842 | 29,920 |
pythondev | help | could that be it | 2018-01-18T20:17:19.000597 | Tisa | pythondev_help_Tisa_2018-01-18T20:17:19.000597 | 1,516,306,639.000597 | 29,921 |
pythondev | help | yep | 2018-01-18T20:17:21.001559 | Garrett | pythondev_help_Garrett_2018-01-18T20:17:21.001559 | 1,516,306,641.001559 | 29,922 |
pythondev | help | yea | 2018-01-18T20:17:22.000734 | Stefan | pythondev_help_Stefan_2018-01-18T20:17:22.000734 | 1,516,306,642.000734 | 29,923 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.