Hi Bird team,
In question 443 in the dev set (“Give the code of sets that have expansion type ‘expansion’?”) for the “card_games” database, the gold SQL is:
SELECT T2.setCode
FROM sets AS T1
INNER JOIN set_translations AS T2 ON T2.setCode = T1.code
WHERE T1.type = 'expansion'
GROUP BY T2.setCode;
Could you clarify why joining to set_translations is necessary here?
The sets table already contains a code column whose description matches “setCode”, and the question does not ask for translations. Is the join required only to satisfy an annotation/evidence mapping that expects the output column name to be setCode, or is there a data rule that a set code is only considered valid if it appears in set_translations?
Thanks!
Hi Bird team,
In question 443 in the dev set (“Give the code of sets that have expansion type ‘expansion’?”) for the “card_games” database, the gold SQL is:
SELECT T2.setCode
FROM sets AS T1
INNER JOIN set_translations AS T2 ON T2.setCode = T1.code
WHERE T1.type = 'expansion'
GROUP BY T2.setCode;
Could you clarify why joining to set_translations is necessary here?
The sets table already contains a
codecolumn whose description matches “setCode”, and the question does not ask for translations. Is the join required only to satisfy an annotation/evidence mapping that expects the output column name to besetCode, or is there a data rule that a set code is only considered valid if it appears in set_translations?Thanks!