## Comparing UTXO transactions with Accounts transactions

Lets consider if Bitcoin had no batching and I had to somehow send BTC to multiple people:

3f99102c76af2ecfe7c7da826cbefd8a5d4465ac2c63e88a975df89b23c8bf5d has 1 input and 5 outputs

Size for each input and output involved in tx

```Input: 91 vB

Output 1: 32 B
Output 2: 32B
Output 3: 32 B
Output 4: 31 B
Output 5: 32 B

Size of original tx: 344 / 235 bytes
Virtual size / weight: 263 / 1049

Fee for original tx: 0.00019 BTC```

If you create 5 transactions to use one input and different outputs mentioned in above tweet, 91*4=360vB extra will be required or maybe more.

If same fee rate is used (73 sat/vB), 0.00026 BTC extra fee will have to paid

SO YOU PAY DOUBLE FEE FOR DOING THE SAME THING and 5x transactions!

One of the reasons batching is used by lot of people in Bitcoin: https://bitcointechtalk.com/saving-up-to-80-on-bitcoin-transaction-fees-by-batching-payments-4147ab7009fb

## Comparing DirectAdmin and CPanel, side by side

I just signed up for an inexpensive DirectAdmin webhosting account, for the sole purpose of comparing DirectAdmin to CPanel (which I use at … | Read the rest of https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1834670&goto=newpost

## Time complexity of comparing \$N\$ strings

I would like to double check myself.

As I understand time complexity of comparing to strings in the worst case is $$O(n)$$, when $$n$$ is the lengths of the strings (let’s say they are equal length).

I case I have $$N$$ strings and I’m checking and I want to know that none of them is the same. The worst case time complexity is $$O(n(N-1)N/2)$$, or I missed something?

## oracle – Comparing records from same table and deleting the old ones

Greeting,
I have a beginner experience with programming in Oracle PL/SQL. The problem I am trying to solve is that in a hypothetical situation, I want to compare records in the same table based on the arbitrary columns called effdt(effective date) and position_nbr(position number). They would be based on new and old records. If the the new effdt field is greater than or equal to(>=) the old effdt based on the old and new position_nbr being equal, I want to delete the old effdt record from the table. Below is the small procedure I have developed to execute.

``````DECLARE
table_cnt_001           NUMBER;
CURSOR ITR1
IS
(SELECT *
FROM
TABLE1 O
INNER JOIN TABLE1 N
ON
N.POSITION_NBR = O.POSITION_NBR
WHERE
N.EFFDT >= O.EFFDT);
BEGIN
SELECT COUNT(*) INTO effdt_cnt_001 FROM TABLE1;
--Checking if table is empty
IF table_cnt_001 !=0 THEN

FOR IT IN ITR1 LOOP
--BEGIN
IF (N.EFFDT >= O.EFFDT) AND (N.POSITION_NBR = O.POSITION_NBR) THEN
DELETE FROM TABLE1 O
WHERE EXISTS(SELECT O.EFFDT FROM TABLE1 O);
END IF;
COMMIT;
--END;
END LOOP;
END IF;
END;
``````

I have gotten the error identifier ‘N.EFFDT’ must be declared. As far as I am concerned, I am refencing the cursor in the for loop and I am not sure why the if statement requests for this column to be declared. Please let me know what could be wrong with this logic or if there is a better way to solve this problem. Thanks in advance.

## Power Automate – How Can I Update a SharePoint List after Comparing Multiple Values from Another List

I have a list of vendors, Vendor Contacts, and I need to update their Agreement Status (Active/Expired/NA) based on another list, Contracts Tracker, that contain their Agreements/Contracts. A vendor will have multiple contracts on the contracts tracker at any given time.

Examples

Vendor Contacts
| Vendor | Agreement Status |
| ——– | ————– |
| Vendor 1 | Active |
| Vendor 2 | Expired |
| Vendor 3 | NA|

Contracts Tracker
| Vendor |Contract Name| Agreement Status |
| ——– |——— |————– |
| Vendor 1 |Name 1| Active |
| Vendor 1 |Name 2| Expired |
| Vendor 2 |Name 1| NA|
| Vendor 2 |Name 2| Expired |
| Vendor 3 |Name 1| NA|

I need to update the a vendor’s status only after comparing the status of all of its contracts. The logic would be as follows:

For any vendor listed in the Vendor Contacts, if any contract is Active on the Contracts tracker, set the agreement status on the contacts list as Active. If there are no active contracts, but there are expired or NA contracts, then set the status to expired. If there are only NA contracts, then set the status to NA.

How would I accomplish this using Power Automate? I’ve seen tutorials that compare single items on each list using an ID or name, but I don’t know how to get the contracts for each vendor then do the comparison. I’m new to all of this so I’m not sure where to start.

Thanks.

## c++ – How to filter std::list and remove non-matching items comparing to another list?

I am trying to remove elements which are not matching with elements from another list.

For example I have `std::list<MyClass> mainList` which contains something like this:

``````ID      Number
-------------
1       100
2       200
3       200
4       100
5       300
``````

And I have one more `std::list<long> itemsForFiltering` which contains: `100, 300`.

And here I am trying to remove all elements from `mainList` which are not in `itemsForFiltering`.

``````int filterList(std::list<MyClass> &mainList, std::list<long> &itemsForFiltering)
{
mainList.remove_if(()(MyClass &val)
{
return val.Number != itemsForFiltering;
});

return 0;
}
``````

This part probably requires one more lambda function `return val.Number != itemsForFiltering;` but I am not sure how to make it. So any help is appreciated.

After calling this function I should get this in `mainList`:

``````ID      Number
-------------
1       100
4       100
5       300
``````

## Does a microcontroller provide better accuracy for comparing algorithms’ run-times?

What do you want – more precise / reproducible results, or faster algorithms?

It’s pointless to measure speed on a microcontroller if you don’t run the algorithm on a microcontroller. You might get highly precise measurements that algorithm A is exactly 5.21% faster running on the microcontroller while on the hardware that the algorithm is designed for, algorithm B is between 5% and 10% faster.

Measure what you want to optimise, not something that you don’t really care about.

## Comparing images of full frame against APS-C at same (large) focal length

As an enthusiast photographer, I am currently working with a Canon 80D with the following lenses:

• Canon EF-S 15-85 mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM
• Canon EF 70-300 mm f4-5.6L IS USM

Only a small fraction of pictures are taken with other lenses.

I am thinking about switching to the new mirrorless Canon RF lineup, preferably the Canon R6. Of course, I am well aware of the consequences. In that case, I should at least replace the lower end lens with an appropriate EF or RF one – probably the RF 24-70 f2.8 or 24-120 f4.

Problem

Today, I evaluated all my photos (by EXIF data) to find out about my past shots. It turns out that around 25 % of my images were taken at the focal length of 300mm, a lot of them when travelling or observing animals (mostly in zoos). Indeed, I appreciate the quality of the EF lens and the large focal length.

Will I be disappointed after a switch to a full frame camera, because I will not get the same frame at 300mm? Or will the image quality that much better so I will not worry about the loss of the pixels?

Assuming the crop-factor of 1.6 at Canon and the 20 MP Canon R6, I would need to crop an image down to 12.5 MP in order to get the same image area as with the 24 MP Canon 80D.

Notes

I know I could solve this problem by buying an additional lens with higher focal length or by buying the R5 which has more pixels.

I am also aware that this is not a classical Q&A question, but I would love to hear some input from other photographers about this dilemma.

## info visualisation – What results to display when comparing current and past data?

Intuitively, I would expect the current list of “Top Locations” to remain in place and in the same order, but simply with an additional bar showing last week’s values.

In the case of no data for the previous week, as in your description of Australia, add an empty bar to be explicit about the “emptiness” of last week’s data, and maybe a short bit of info describing the data, or, if you feel it flows better, as a footnote.

(Still do keep the data on the right; I just didn’t mock it up. Perhaps Australia’s percentage change label is where the asterisk belongs to indicate that this data has an explanation.)

Also relevant, I would recommend considering using flat ends for your bars, specifically when comparisons are necessary. The rounded ends are more difficult to see how visually significant the difference in length is.

## search – Filtering comparing Multi Value Taxonomy Managed Property and a Multi Value Query String Variable

When I use below line it works:

``````{|MultiValuedTaxManagedProperty:{Page.MultiValueTaxField}}
``````

However I would like to do the same with a query string parameter:
URL?Param1=Value1;Value2;Value3

``````{|MultiValuedTaxManagedProperty:{QueryString.Param1}}
``````

Am I using wrong format for Param1?