Optimizing Performance of LookML Queries recensioni

María Del Mar D. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Jaume A. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

V S. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

done

Vani M. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Yaxiong W. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

María Del Mar D. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Marie-Christine C. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Multiple notes, in order: - 1 hour and 30 minutes is NOT enough to do this lab properly and read through things and extra resources being listed within the lab. At least another 30 minutes would be required. - In the section "Implement caching policies", you are describing an extract, load, transform process but then you summarize that as "ETL" instead of "ELT". - In the section "Join the minimal amount of views to define new Explores", you state that the one_to_many configuration may not be the "most optimal configuration" when in fact this is not about optimal, using one_to_many here is just incorrect. - In the section "Define performant join relationships for efficient Explore queries", you provide the instruction - "Return to the browser tab for the Explore query, and refresh the page." and then speak about there being 2 queries, which I understand, but when you ask folks to refresh the page the explore runs automatically and if you are not quick enough you won't see the query that generates the table because you will already have run the updated configuration. Either find a different way to do this (like opening through a new tab) or provide a workaround for folks to see the 2 queries. - In the section "Modify and review PDTs in development", the question "Why is aggregated_orders::aggregate_sales still not listed under the Production tab, even though it was built successfully?" doesn't make sense. "aggregated_orders::aggregate_sales" IS listed within the Production tab as its previous version that was run, it didn't go anywhere, it is just also listed in the Development tab because of the changes we implemented in Development. - The section 4 is missing a completion check as if it isn't even part of this lab. - In the section "Ready for more?", and this I think applies to all labs I took so far, please suggest the next step in the learning path or at least don't suggest something general/unspecific/unrelated to the current lab being done.

Tiago R. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

素 李. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Ajit P. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Gopi J. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Martyna K. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Good

Gitesh G. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Dr. Kondala Kameswara Rao N. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

537 Chinni krishna M. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Saurav K. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

YOGENDER S. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Kishan P. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Raji n. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

good

Bhumika H. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Puneeth Kumar O. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

VASA Y. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Naga sai R. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Mylena B. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa

Laxmidhar S. · Recensione inserita oltre 3 anni fa