RagingHungryPanda

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Oh god that really puts the brutal in it. That just sounds terrible

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I would like to share this video by Dami Lee, who does architecture oriented videos and did an episode featuring this manga

https://youtu.be/_ynSG5GLoQ0

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know, it might not be a bad idea, because once regular people realize agriculture is exempt from minimum pay laws and OSHA, they might demand change

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I've saved this post. I need this.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Renewable biomass: burning forests before you turn them to coal

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

About 50 hours and just got my ass handed to me by Fist guy or whatever at the inn while most of my party had 1 HP left, so there's that. This is my first playthrough.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One thing to know about transactions is that they track data and then write it. It's not the opening that slows it down. I have a question though, what is your source data? Do you have a big CSV for something? Can you do a db to db transfer instead? There's another tool called the BCP utility.

Edit: SQL server/ssms have tools for doing migrations and batch imports

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I've done a lot of work and no, that is not normal.

A few things: First - SQL server has tools for migrating data that's pretty fast. SQL bulk copy can use some of these. Check to see if the built in db tools are better for this.

SQL bulk copy can handle way more than 15,000 records

Why are you wrapping a data dump in a transaction? That will slow things down for sure.

You generally shouldn't be doing huge queries like that to where you're nearing the parameter limit.

Can you share the code?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It looked like it was a combination with that and the chemical they washed it with. Also, for this particular product, it isn't healthy to use the sulfur treatment, it seems. The producers said something to the effect of, "we know this will cause problems for people, but the fruit is prettier and we get better prices for them".

The news company said that they tested them as well and found them to be toxic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

and also in the article

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Why do comments like these get remove? This is a bit ridiculous. I get why someone would get tired of seeing the same comments over time, but to censor it? c'mon.

view more: ‹ prev next ›