Skip to content

Conversation

@hinduja97
Copy link

No description provided.

@super30admin
Copy link
Owner

The student's solution demonstrates a good understanding of SQL queries and problem-solving approaches. Here's a detailed evaluation:

  1. CustomersWho.sql:

    • Correctness: The query correctly identifies customers who have bought all products by comparing distinct product counts with the total product count.
    • Time Complexity: O(n) where n is the number of records in the customer table (assuming proper indexing).
    • Space Complexity: Minimal as it only needs to store intermediate results for the group by and having clauses.
    • Code Quality: Clean and concise, follows best practices.
    • Efficiency: Well-optimized as it uses a single pass through the data with aggregation.
  2. ProductAnalysis.sql:

    • Solution 1:
      • Correctness: Correctly identifies first year sales using DENSE_RANK().
      • Time Complexity: O(n log n) due to the window function sorting.
      • Space Complexity: Higher due to window function creating additional data structures.
      • Code Quality: Readable but window functions can be expensive.
    • Solution 2:
      • Correctness: Correct alternative approach using GROUP BY and JOIN.
      • Time Complexity: O(n) for the group by and O(n) for the join (assuming proper indexing).
      • Space Complexity: Lower than Solution 1 as it doesn't use window functions.
      • Code Quality: Well-structured and efficient.
    • Both solutions are correct, but Solution 2 is more efficient for this specific problem.

General Observations:

  • The student shows good problem-solving skills by providing multiple solutions.
  • The code is well-formatted and easy to read.
  • The README.md is empty - it would be good practice to include a brief problem description.

Areas for Improvement:

  • For ProductAnalysis.sql, Solution 1 could be noted as less efficient due to window function overhead.
  • Adding comments explaining the approach would be helpful for maintainability.
  • The empty README.md could be improved with documentation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants