I went with WHERE RAND() < 0.1 which works fine, but then spent like two minutes nervously over-explaining why it's approximate and not exact.
Start by clarifying the database system (e.g., PostgreSQL, MySQL, BigQuery) and the definition of 'randomly' and 'roughly 10%'. Then propose a sampling method that balances randomness with performance on large tables, such as using a hash of a unique key or TABLESAMPLE if supported.
Pro tip: For very large tables, avoid ORDER BY RAND() as it requires a full sort; instead use a deterministic hash-based approach that can leverage indexes or partitions. Also mention that 'roughly' allows for statistical sampling, which is often more efficient than exact 10%.
Ask about the database system, table size, and whether the sample needs to be exactly 10% or approximately 10%. Confirm if randomness should be uniform across all rows.
Select an appropriate technique: TABLESAMPLE (if available), hash-based sampling (e.g., MOD(ABS(HASH(user_id)), 10) = 0), or random() < 0.1. Consider performance and randomness quality.
Construct the query using the chosen method, ensuring it is efficient and correct. For example: SELECT * FROM users WHERE MOD(ABS(HASH(user_id)), 10) = 0; or SELECT * FROM users TABLESAMPLE BERNOULLI(10);
Explain the pros and cons of your approach: hash-based is deterministic and fast but may have slight bias; random() is simple but slow on large tables; TABLESAMPLE is fast but may not be supported everywhere.
Mention how to verify the sample size (e.g., COUNT(*)) and suggest optimizations like using a subquery or leveraging partitioning if the table is partitioned.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.