I guess I don’t need support, but I wish to inform you that there is an error in the DBMS and SQL basics post I thought you may wish to correct.

" For example, say we want to retrieve the marks from the student table that has data for marks, roll numbers, and names. The command would be as follows:
SELECT Name FROM student WHERE marks>95 "

As you can see, the mistake is either in the preceding statement, or in the code.
if the statement is correct, then the code should read like:
SELECT Name, marks FROM student WHERE marks>95,
alternately, if the code is correct, then the statement should begin something more like:
" For example, say we want to retrieve the Names of all students whose mark is greater than 95 from the student table … etc…"

Thank you for helping make FCC better. Bugs can be reported as GitHub Issues. Whenever reporting a bug, please check first that there isn’t already an issue for it and provide as much detail as possible.

If the statement is correct, then technically the following would be the correct SQL statement:

SELECT marks FROM student WHERE marks > 95

The statement only mentions retrieving marks and not Name.

If your statement was the original intent for the article, then the following would be the correct SQL statement:

SELECT Name FROM student WHERE marks > 95

well there you go I had provided every relevant detail, I must be awesome. maybe someday I will find out how to use github Issues, certainly not right now.

GitHub issues is very simple to use. There are buttons you click to open an issue and then you fill out a template. (Similar to the forum here)

yeah well bro wake up it also has an obvious mistake. Your very obvious pointing out of the original Statement only asked for marks and not Name doesn’t make any sense. The original blog post statement wanted marks but queried Name instead. yeah I get that if you only want marks you would not ask for Name AND marks, however it makes zero sense to ask for just marks. I merely made a Query that actually made sense, and since the original made no sense, I could obviously only very loosely follow its example. I mean seriously, who the heck would want a random number > 95 with nothing attached? I could make up 5 such numbers without running a query at all.

yes thank you. it is certainly on my todo list.

additionally it is weird that you ended your reply to me by repeating information I already clearly laid out. I clearly already stated that for the originally laid out query
SELECT Name FROM student WHERE marks > 95
to be correct, the statement preceding that would have to ask for Names of all students who mark is greater than 95 from the student table, rather than asking for marks, which is what the original wording asked for but did not include in the query, hence the entire purpose of the post in the first place. My best guess is that you didn’t even look at the original blog post before replying to my post about it? otherwise I just don’t know why you would reply to my post, restating exactly a part of my post, but only showing quotes for some bits and further confusing things by quoting bits what were originally quoted in the first place, thereby not showing who is quoting what and making a muddy mess.