Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE

Practical SQL Puzzles That Will Level Up Your Skill

There are some Sql patterns that, once you know them, you start seeing them everywhere. The solutions to the puzzles that I will show you today are actually very simple SQL queries, but understanding the concept behind them will surely unlock new solutions to the queries you write on a day-to-day basis. These challenges are all based on real-world scenarios, as over the past few months I made a point of writing down every puzzle-like query that I had to build. I also encourage you to try them for yourself, so that you can challenge yourself first, which will improve your learning! All queries to generate the datasets will be provided in a PostgreSQL and DuckDB-friendly syntax, so that you can easily copy and play with them. At the end I will also provide you a link to a GitHub repo containing all the code, as well as the answer to the bonus challenge I will leave for you! I organized these puzzles in order of increasing difficulty, so, if you find the first ones too easy, at least take a look at the last one, which uses a technique that I truly believe you won’t have seen before. Okay, let’s get started. I love this puzzle because of how short and simple the final query is, even though it deals with many edge cases. The data for this challenge shows tickets moving in between Kanban stages, and the objective is to find how long, on average, tickets stay in the Doing stage. The data contains the ID of the ticket, the date the ticket was created, the date of the move, and the “from” and “to” stages of the move. The stages present are New, Doing, Review, and Done. Some things you need to know (edge cases): Tickets can move backwards, meaning tickets can go back to the Doing stage. You should not include tickets that are still stuck in the Doing stage, as there is no way to know how long they will stay there for. Tickets are not always created in the New stage. “`SQL CREATE TABLE ticket_moves ( ticket_id INT NOT NULL, create_date DATE NOT NULL, move_date DATE NOT NULL, from_stage TEXT NOT NULL, to_stage TEXT NOT NULL ); “` “`SQL INSERT INTO ticket_moves (ticket_id, create_date, move_date, from_stage, to_stage) VALUES — Ticket 1: Created in “New”, then moves to Doing, Review, Done. (1, ‘2024-09-01’, ‘2024-09-03’, ‘New’, ‘Doing’), (1, ‘2024-09-01’, ‘2024-09-07’, ‘Doing’, ‘Review’), (1, ‘2024-09-01’, ‘2024-09-10’, ‘Review’, ‘Done’), — Ticket 2: Created in “New”, then moves: New → Doing → Review → Doing again → Review. (2, ‘2024-09-05’, ‘2024-09-08’, ‘New’, ‘Doing’), (2, ‘2024-09-05’, ‘2024-09-12’, ‘Doing’, ‘Review’), (2, ‘2024-09-05’, ‘2024-09-15’, ‘Review’, ‘Doing’), (2, ‘2024-09-05’, ‘2024-09-20’, ‘Doing’, ‘Review’), — Ticket 3: Created in “New”, then moves to Doing. (Edge case: no subsequent move from Doing.) (3, ‘2024-09-10’, ‘2024-09-16’, ‘New’, ‘Doing’), — Ticket 4: Created already in “Doing”, then moves to Review. (4, ‘2024-09-15’, ‘2024-09-22’, ‘Doing’, ‘Review’); “` A summary of the data: Ticket 1: Created in the New stage, moves normally to Doing, then Review, and then Done. Ticket 2: Created in New, then moves: New → Doing → Review → Doing again → Review. Ticket 3: Created in New, moves to Doing, but it is still stuck there. Ticket 4: Created in the Doing stage, moves to Review afterward. It might be a good idea to stop for a bit and think how you would deal with this. Can you find out how long a ticket stays on a single stage? Honestly, this sounds intimidating at first, and it looks like it will be a nightmare to deal with all the edge cases. Let me show you the full solution to the problem, and then I will explain what is happening afterward. “`SQL WITH stage_intervals AS (     SELECT         ticket_id,         from_stage,         move_date          – COALESCE(             LAG(move_date) OVER (                 PARTITION BY ticket_id                  ORDER BY move_date             ),              create_date         ) AS days_in_stage     FROM         ticket_moves ) SELECT     SUM(days_in_stage) / COUNT(DISTINCT ticket_id) as avg_days_in_doing FROM     stage_intervals WHERE     from_stage = ‘Doing’; “` The first CTE uses the LAG function to find the previous move of the ticket, which will be the time the ticket entered that stage. Calculating the duration is as simple as subtracting the previous date from the move date. What you should notice is the use of the COALESCE in the previous move date. What that does is that if a ticket doesn’t have a previous move, then it uses the date of creation of the ticket. This takes care of the cases of tickets being created directly into the Doing stage, as it still will properly calculate the time it took to leave the stage. This is the result of the first CTE, showing the time spent in each stage. Notice how the Ticket 2 has two entries, as it visited the Doing stage in two separate occasions. With this done, it’s just a matter of getting the average as the SUM of total days spent in doing, divided by the distinct number of tickets that ever left the stage. Doing it this way, instead of simply using the AVG, makes sure that the two rows for Ticket 2 get properly accounted for as a single ticket. Not so bad, right? The goal of this second challenge is to find the most recent contract sequence of every employee. A break of sequence happens when two contracts have a gap of more than one day between them.  In this dataset, there are no contract overlaps, meaning that a contract for the same employee either has a gap or ends a day before the new one starts. “`SQL CREATE TABLE contracts (     contract_id integer PRIMARY KEY,     employee_id integer NOT NULL,     start_date date NOT NULL,     end_date date NOT NULL ); INSERT INTO contracts (contract_id, employee_id, start_date, end_date) VALUES      — Employee 1: Two continuous contracts     (1, 1, ‘2024-01-01’, ‘2024-03-31’),     (2, 1, ‘2024-04-01’, ‘2024-06-30’),     — Employee 2: One contract, then a gap of three days, then two contracts     (3, 2, ‘2024-01-01’, ‘2024-02-15’),     (4, 2, ‘2024-02-19’, ‘2024-04-30’),     (5, 2, ‘2024-05-01’, ‘2024-07-31’),     — Employee 3: One contract     (6, 3, ‘2024-03-01’, ‘2024-08-31’); “` As a summary of the data: Employee 1: Has two continuous contracts. Employee 2: One contract, then a gap of three days, then two contracts. Employee 3: One contract. The expected result, given the dataset, is that all contracts should be included except for the first contract of Employee 2, which is the only one that has a gap. Before explaining the logic behind the solution, I would like you to think about what operation can be used to join the contracts that belong to the same sequence. Focus only on the second row of data, what information do you need to know if this contract was a break or not? I hope it’s clear that this is the perfect situation for window functions, again. They are incredibly useful for solving problems like this, and understanding when to use them helps a lot in finding clean solutions to problems. First thing to do, then, is to get the end date of the previous contract for the same employee with the LAG function. Doing that, it’s simple to compare both dates and check if it was a break of sequence. “`SQL WITH ordered_contracts AS (     SELECT         *,         LAG(end_date) OVER (PARTITION BY employee_id ORDER BY start_date) AS previous_end_date     FROM         contracts ), gapped_contracts AS (     SELECT         *,         — Deals with the case of the first contract, which won’t have         — a previous end date. In this case, it’s still the start of a new         — sequence.         CASE WHEN previous_end_date IS NULL             OR previous_end_date < start_date – INTERVAL '1 day' THEN             1         ELSE             0         END AS is_new_sequence     FROM         ordered_contracts ) SELECT * FROM gapped_contracts ORDER BY employee_id ASC; “` An intuitive way to continue the query is to number the sequences of each employee. For example, an employee who has no gap, will always be on his first sequence, but an employee who had 5 breaks in contracts will be on his 5th sequence. Funnily enough, this is done by another window function. “`SQL — — Previous CTEs — sequences AS (     SELECT         *,         SUM(is_new_sequence) OVER (PARTITION BY employee_id ORDER BY start_date) AS sequence_id FROM     gapped_contracts ) SELECT * FROM sequences ORDER BY employee_id ASC; “` Notice how, for Employee 2, he starts his sequence #2 after the first gapped value. To finish this query, I grouped the data by employee, got the value of their most recent sequence, and then did an inner join with the sequences to keep only the most recent one. “`SQL — — Previous CTEs — max_sequence AS (     SELECT         employee_id,         MAX(sequence_id) AS max_sequence_id FROM     sequences GROUP BY     employee_id ), latest_contract_sequence AS (     SELECT         c.contract_id,         c.employee_id,         c.start_date,         c.end_date     FROM         sequences c         JOIN max_sequence m ON c.sequence_id = m.max_sequence_id             AND c.employee_id = m.employee_id         ORDER BY             c.employee_id,             c.start_date ) SELECT     * FROM     latest_contract_sequence; “` As expected, our final result is basically our starting query just with the first contract of Employee 2 missing!  Finally, the last puzzle — I’m glad you made it this far.  For me, this is the most mind-blowing one, as when I first encountered this problem I thought of a completely different solution that would be a mess to implement in SQL. For this puzzle, I’ve changed the context from what I had to deal with for my job, as I think it will make it easier to explain.  Imagine you’re a data analyst at an event venue, and you’re analyzing the talks scheduled for an upcoming event. You want to find the time of day where there will be the highest number of talks happening at the same time. This is what you should know about the schedules: Rooms are booked in increments of 30min, e.g. from 9h-10h30. The data is clean, there are no overbookings of meeting rooms. There can be back-to-back meetings in a single meeting room. Meeting schedule visualized (this is the actual data).  “`SQL CREATE TABLE meetings (     room TEXT NOT NULL,     start_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,     end_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL ); INSERT INTO meetings (room, start_time, end_time) VALUES     — Room A meetings     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 10:00', '2024-10-01 11:00'),     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 11:00', '2024-10-01 12:00'),     — Room B meetings     ('Room B', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 11:30'),     — Room C meetings     ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),     ('Room C', '2024-10-01 11:30', '2024-10-01 12:00'); “` The way to solve this is using what is called a Sweep Line Algorithm, or also known as an event-based solution. This last name actually helps to understand what will be done, as the idea is that instead of dealing with intervals, which is what we have in the original data, we deal with events instead. To do this, we need to transform every row into two separate events. The first event will be the Start of the meeting, and the second event will be the End of the meeting. “`SQL WITH events AS (   — Create an event for the start of each meeting (+1)   SELECT      start_time AS event_time,      1 AS delta   FROM meetings   UNION ALL   — Create an event for the end of each meeting (-1)   SELECT     — Small trick to work with the back-to-back meetings (explained later)     end_time – interval '1 minute' as end_time,     -1 AS delta   FROM meetings ) SELECT * FROM events; “` Take the time to understand what is happening here. To create two events from a single row of data, we’re simply unioning the dataset on itself; the first half uses the start time as the timestamp, and the second part uses the end time. You might already notice the delta column created and see where this is going. When an event starts, we count it as +1, when it ends, we count it as -1. You might even be already thinking of another window function to solve this, and you’re actually right! But before that, let me just explain the trick I used in the end dates. As I don’t want back-to-back meetings to count as two concurrent meetings, I’m subtracting a single minute of every end date. This way, if a meeting ends and another starts at 10h30, it won’t be assumed that two meetings are concurrently happening at 10h30. Okay, back to the query and yet another window function. This time, though, the function of choice is a rolling SUM. “`SQL — — Previous CTEs — ordered_events AS (   SELECT     event_time,     delta,     SUM(delta) OVER (ORDER BY event_time, delta DESC) AS concurrent_meetings   FROM events ) SELECT * FROM ordered_events ORDER BY event_time DESC; “` The rolling SUM at the Delta column is essentially walking down every record and finding how many events are active at that time. For example, at 9 am sharp, it sees two events starting, so it marks the number of concurrent meetings as two! When the third meeting starts, the count goes up to three. But when it gets to 9h59 (10 am), then two meetings end, bringing the counter back to one. With this data, the only thing missing is to find when the highest value of concurrent meetings happens. “`SQL — — Previous CTEs — max_events AS (   — Find the maximum concurrent meetings value   SELECT      event_time,      concurrent_meetings,     RANK() OVER (ORDER BY concurrent_meetings DESC) AS rnk   FROM ordered_events ) SELECT event_time, concurrent_meetings FROM max_events WHERE rnk = 1; “` That’s it! The interval of 9h30–10h is the one with the largest number of concurrent meetings, which checks out with the schedule visualization above! This solution looks incredibly simple in my opinion, and it works for so many situations. Every time you are dealing with intervals now, you should think if the query wouldn’t be easier if you thought about it in the perspective of events. But before you move on, and to really nail down this concept, I want to leave you with a bonus challenge, which is also a common application of the Sweep Line Algorithm. I hope you give it a try! Bonus challenge The context for this one is still the same as the last puzzle, but now, instead of trying to find the period when there are most concurrent meetings, the objective is to find bad scheduling. It seems that there are overlaps in the meeting rooms, which need to be listed so it can be fixed ASAP. How would you find out if the same meeting room has two or more meetings booked at the same time? Here are some tips on how to solve it: It’s still the same algorithm. This means you will still do the UNION, but it will look slightly different. You should think in the perspective of each meeting room. You can use this data for the challenge: “`SQL CREATE TABLE meetings_overlap (     room TEXT NOT NULL,     start_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,     end_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL ); INSERT INTO meetings_overlap (room, start_time, end_time) VALUES     — Room A meetings     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 10:00', '2024-10-01 11:00'),     ('Room A', '2024-10-01 11:00', '2024-10-01 12:00'),     — Room B meetings     ('Room B', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 11:30'),     — Room C meetings     ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),     — Overlaps with previous meeting.     ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 12:00'); “` If you’re interested in the solution to this puzzle, as well as the rest of the queries, check this GitHub repo. The first takeaway from this blog post is that window functions are overpowered. Ever since I got more comfortable with using them, I feel that my queries have gotten so much simpler and easier to read, and I hope the same happens to you. If you’re interested in learning more about them, you would probably enjoy reading this other blog post I’ve written, where I go over how you can understand and use them effectively. The second takeaway is that these patterns used in the challenges really do happen in many other places. You might need to find sequences of subscriptions, customer retention, or you might need to find overlap of tasks. There are many situations when you will need to use window functions in a very similar fashion to what was done in the puzzles. The third thing I want you to remember is about this solution to using events besides dealing with intervals. I’ve looked at some problems I solved a long time ago that I could’ve used this pattern on to make my life easier, and unfortunately, I didn’t know about it at the time. I really do hope you enjoyed this post and gave a shot to the puzzles yourself. And I’m sure that if you made it this far, you either learned something new about SQL or strengthened your knowledge of window functions!  Thank you so much for reading. If you have questions or just want to get in touch with me, don’t hesitate to contact me at mtrentz.com. All images by the author unless stated otherwise.

There are some Sql patterns that, once you know them, you start seeing them everywhere. The solutions to the puzzles that I will show you today are actually very simple SQL queries, but understanding the concept behind them will surely unlock new solutions to the queries you write on a day-to-day basis.

These challenges are all based on real-world scenarios, as over the past few months I made a point of writing down every puzzle-like query that I had to build. I also encourage you to try them for yourself, so that you can challenge yourself first, which will improve your learning!

All queries to generate the datasets will be provided in a PostgreSQL and DuckDB-friendly syntax, so that you can easily copy and play with them. At the end I will also provide you a link to a GitHub repo containing all the code, as well as the answer to the bonus challenge I will leave for you!

I organized these puzzles in order of increasing difficulty, so, if you find the first ones too easy, at least take a look at the last one, which uses a technique that I truly believe you won’t have seen before.

Okay, let’s get started.

I love this puzzle because of how short and simple the final query is, even though it deals with many edge cases. The data for this challenge shows tickets moving in between Kanban stages, and the objective is to find how long, on average, tickets stay in the Doing stage.

The data contains the ID of the ticket, the date the ticket was created, the date of the move, and the “from” and “to” stages of the move. The stages present are New, Doing, Review, and Done.

Some things you need to know (edge cases):

  • Tickets can move backwards, meaning tickets can go back to the Doing stage.
  • You should not include tickets that are still stuck in the Doing stage, as there is no way to know how long they will stay there for.
  • Tickets are not always created in the New stage.
```SQL

CREATE TABLE ticket_moves (
    ticket_id INT NOT NULL,
    create_date DATE NOT NULL,
    move_date DATE NOT NULL,
    from_stage TEXT NOT NULL,
    to_stage TEXT NOT NULL
);

```
```SQL

INSERT INTO ticket_moves (ticket_id, create_date, move_date, from_stage, to_stage)
    VALUES
        -- Ticket 1: Created in "New", then moves to Doing, Review, Done.
        (1, '2024-09-01', '2024-09-03', 'New', 'Doing'),
        (1, '2024-09-01', '2024-09-07', 'Doing', 'Review'),
        (1, '2024-09-01', '2024-09-10', 'Review', 'Done'),
        -- Ticket 2: Created in "New", then moves: New → Doing → Review → Doing again → Review.
        (2, '2024-09-05', '2024-09-08', 'New', 'Doing'),
        (2, '2024-09-05', '2024-09-12', 'Doing', 'Review'),
        (2, '2024-09-05', '2024-09-15', 'Review', 'Doing'),
        (2, '2024-09-05', '2024-09-20', 'Doing', 'Review'),
        -- Ticket 3: Created in "New", then moves to Doing. (Edge case: no subsequent move from Doing.)
        (3, '2024-09-10', '2024-09-16', 'New', 'Doing'),
        -- Ticket 4: Created already in "Doing", then moves to Review.
        (4, '2024-09-15', '2024-09-22', 'Doing', 'Review');
```

A summary of the data:

  • Ticket 1: Created in the New stage, moves normally to Doing, then Review, and then Done.
  • Ticket 2: Created in New, then moves: New → Doing → Review → Doing again → Review.
  • Ticket 3: Created in New, moves to Doing, but it is still stuck there.
  • Ticket 4: Created in the Doing stage, moves to Review afterward.

It might be a good idea to stop for a bit and think how you would deal with this. Can you find out how long a ticket stays on a single stage?

Honestly, this sounds intimidating at first, and it looks like it will be a nightmare to deal with all the edge cases. Let me show you the full solution to the problem, and then I will explain what is happening afterward.

```SQL

WITH stage_intervals AS (
    SELECT
        ticket_id,
        from_stage,
        move_date 
        - COALESCE(
            LAG(move_date) OVER (
                PARTITION BY ticket_id 
                ORDER BY move_date
            ), 
            create_date
        ) AS days_in_stage
    FROM
        ticket_moves
)
SELECT
    SUM(days_in_stage) / COUNT(DISTINCT ticket_id) as avg_days_in_doing
FROM
    stage_intervals
WHERE
    from_stage = 'Doing';
```

The first CTE uses the LAG function to find the previous move of the ticket, which will be the time the ticket entered that stage. Calculating the duration is as simple as subtracting the previous date from the move date.

What you should notice is the use of the COALESCE in the previous move date. What that does is that if a ticket doesn’t have a previous move, then it uses the date of creation of the ticket. This takes care of the cases of tickets being created directly into the Doing stage, as it still will properly calculate the time it took to leave the stage.

This is the result of the first CTE, showing the time spent in each stage. Notice how the Ticket 2 has two entries, as it visited the Doing stage in two separate occasions.

With this done, it’s just a matter of getting the average as the SUM of total days spent in doing, divided by the distinct number of tickets that ever left the stage. Doing it this way, instead of simply using the AVG, makes sure that the two rows for Ticket 2 get properly accounted for as a single ticket.

Not so bad, right?

The goal of this second challenge is to find the most recent contract sequence of every employee. A break of sequence happens when two contracts have a gap of more than one day between them. 

In this dataset, there are no contract overlaps, meaning that a contract for the same employee either has a gap or ends a day before the new one starts.

```SQL
CREATE TABLE contracts (
    contract_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
    employee_id integer NOT NULL,
    start_date date NOT NULL,
    end_date date NOT NULL
);

INSERT INTO contracts (contract_id, employee_id, start_date, end_date)
VALUES 
    -- Employee 1: Two continuous contracts
    (1, 1, '2024-01-01', '2024-03-31'),
    (2, 1, '2024-04-01', '2024-06-30'),
    -- Employee 2: One contract, then a gap of three days, then two contracts
    (3, 2, '2024-01-01', '2024-02-15'),
    (4, 2, '2024-02-19', '2024-04-30'),
    (5, 2, '2024-05-01', '2024-07-31'),
    -- Employee 3: One contract
    (6, 3, '2024-03-01', '2024-08-31');
```

As a summary of the data:

  • Employee 1: Has two continuous contracts.
  • Employee 2: One contract, then a gap of three days, then two contracts.
  • Employee 3: One contract.

The expected result, given the dataset, is that all contracts should be included except for the first contract of Employee 2, which is the only one that has a gap.

Before explaining the logic behind the solution, I would like you to think about what operation can be used to join the contracts that belong to the same sequence. Focus only on the second row of data, what information do you need to know if this contract was a break or not?

I hope it’s clear that this is the perfect situation for window functions, again. They are incredibly useful for solving problems like this, and understanding when to use them helps a lot in finding clean solutions to problems.

First thing to do, then, is to get the end date of the previous contract for the same employee with the LAG function. Doing that, it’s simple to compare both dates and check if it was a break of sequence.

```SQL
WITH ordered_contracts AS (
    SELECT
        *,
        LAG(end_date) OVER (PARTITION BY employee_id ORDER BY start_date) AS previous_end_date
    FROM
        contracts
),
gapped_contracts AS (
    SELECT
        *,
        -- Deals with the case of the first contract, which won't have
        -- a previous end date. In this case, it's still the start of a new
        -- sequence.
        CASE WHEN previous_end_date IS NULL
            OR previous_end_date < start_date - INTERVAL '1 day' THEN
            1
        ELSE
            0
        END AS is_new_sequence
    FROM
        ordered_contracts
)
SELECT * FROM gapped_contracts ORDER BY employee_id ASC;
```

An intuitive way to continue the query is to number the sequences of each employee. For example, an employee who has no gap, will always be on his first sequence, but an employee who had 5 breaks in contracts will be on his 5th sequence. Funnily enough, this is done by another window function.

```SQL
--
-- Previous CTEs
--
sequences AS (
    SELECT
        *,
        SUM(is_new_sequence) OVER (PARTITION BY employee_id ORDER BY start_date) AS sequence_id
FROM
    gapped_contracts
)
SELECT * FROM sequences ORDER BY employee_id ASC;
```

Notice how, for Employee 2, he starts his sequence #2 after the first gapped value. To finish this query, I grouped the data by employee, got the value of their most recent sequence, and then did an inner join with the sequences to keep only the most recent one.

```SQL
--
-- Previous CTEs
--
max_sequence AS (
    SELECT
        employee_id,
        MAX(sequence_id) AS max_sequence_id
FROM
    sequences
GROUP BY
    employee_id
),
latest_contract_sequence AS (
    SELECT
        c.contract_id,
        c.employee_id,
        c.start_date,
        c.end_date
    FROM
        sequences c
        JOIN max_sequence m ON c.sequence_id = m.max_sequence_id
            AND c.employee_id = m.employee_id
        ORDER BY
            c.employee_id,
            c.start_date
)
SELECT
    *
FROM
    latest_contract_sequence;
```

As expected, our final result is basically our starting query just with the first contract of Employee 2 missing! 

Finally, the last puzzle — I’m glad you made it this far. 

For me, this is the most mind-blowing one, as when I first encountered this problem I thought of a completely different solution that would be a mess to implement in SQL.

For this puzzle, I’ve changed the context from what I had to deal with for my job, as I think it will make it easier to explain. 

Imagine you’re a data analyst at an event venue, and you’re analyzing the talks scheduled for an upcoming event. You want to find the time of day where there will be the highest number of talks happening at the same time.

This is what you should know about the schedules:

  • Rooms are booked in increments of 30min, e.g. from 9h-10h30.
  • The data is clean, there are no overbookings of meeting rooms.
  • There can be back-to-back meetings in a single meeting room.

Meeting schedule visualized (this is the actual data). 

```SQL
CREATE TABLE meetings (
    room TEXT NOT NULL,
    start_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
    end_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL
);

INSERT INTO meetings (room, start_time, end_time) VALUES
    -- Room A meetings
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 10:00', '2024-10-01 11:00'),
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 11:00', '2024-10-01 12:00'),
    -- Room B meetings
    ('Room B', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 11:30'),
    -- Room C meetings
    ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),
    ('Room C', '2024-10-01 11:30', '2024-10-01 12:00');
```

The way to solve this is using what is called a Sweep Line Algorithm, or also known as an event-based solution. This last name actually helps to understand what will be done, as the idea is that instead of dealing with intervals, which is what we have in the original data, we deal with events instead.

To do this, we need to transform every row into two separate events. The first event will be the Start of the meeting, and the second event will be the End of the meeting.

```SQL
WITH events AS (
  -- Create an event for the start of each meeting (+1)
  SELECT 
    start_time AS event_time, 
    1 AS delta
  FROM meetings
  UNION ALL
  -- Create an event for the end of each meeting (-1)
  SELECT 
   -- Small trick to work with the back-to-back meetings (explained later)
    end_time - interval '1 minute' as end_time,
    -1 AS delta
  FROM meetings
)
SELECT * FROM events;
```

Take the time to understand what is happening here. To create two events from a single row of data, we’re simply unioning the dataset on itself; the first half uses the start time as the timestamp, and the second part uses the end time.

You might already notice the delta column created and see where this is going. When an event starts, we count it as +1, when it ends, we count it as -1. You might even be already thinking of another window function to solve this, and you’re actually right!

But before that, let me just explain the trick I used in the end dates. As I don’t want back-to-back meetings to count as two concurrent meetings, I’m subtracting a single minute of every end date. This way, if a meeting ends and another starts at 10h30, it won’t be assumed that two meetings are concurrently happening at 10h30.

Okay, back to the query and yet another window function. This time, though, the function of choice is a rolling SUM.

```SQL
--
-- Previous CTEs
--
ordered_events AS (
  SELECT
    event_time,
    delta,
    SUM(delta) OVER (ORDER BY event_time, delta DESC) AS concurrent_meetings
  FROM events
)
SELECT * FROM ordered_events ORDER BY event_time DESC;
```

The rolling SUM at the Delta column is essentially walking down every record and finding how many events are active at that time. For example, at 9 am sharp, it sees two events starting, so it marks the number of concurrent meetings as two!

When the third meeting starts, the count goes up to three. But when it gets to 9h59 (10 am), then two meetings end, bringing the counter back to one. With this data, the only thing missing is to find when the highest value of concurrent meetings happens.

```SQL
--
-- Previous CTEs
--
max_events AS (
  -- Find the maximum concurrent meetings value
  SELECT 
    event_time, 
    concurrent_meetings,
    RANK() OVER (ORDER BY concurrent_meetings DESC) AS rnk
  FROM ordered_events
)
SELECT event_time, concurrent_meetings
FROM max_events
WHERE rnk = 1;
```

That’s it! The interval of 9h30–10h is the one with the largest number of concurrent meetings, which checks out with the schedule visualization above!

This solution looks incredibly simple in my opinion, and it works for so many situations. Every time you are dealing with intervals now, you should think if the query wouldn’t be easier if you thought about it in the perspective of events.

But before you move on, and to really nail down this concept, I want to leave you with a bonus challenge, which is also a common application of the Sweep Line Algorithm. I hope you give it a try!

Bonus challenge

The context for this one is still the same as the last puzzle, but now, instead of trying to find the period when there are most concurrent meetings, the objective is to find bad scheduling. It seems that there are overlaps in the meeting rooms, which need to be listed so it can be fixed ASAP.

How would you find out if the same meeting room has two or more meetings booked at the same time? Here are some tips on how to solve it:

  • It’s still the same algorithm.
  • This means you will still do the UNION, but it will look slightly different.
  • You should think in the perspective of each meeting room.

You can use this data for the challenge:

```SQL
CREATE TABLE meetings_overlap (
    room TEXT NOT NULL,
    start_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
    end_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL
);

INSERT INTO meetings_overlap (room, start_time, end_time) VALUES
    -- Room A meetings
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 10:00', '2024-10-01 11:00'),
    ('Room A', '2024-10-01 11:00', '2024-10-01 12:00'),
    -- Room B meetings
    ('Room B', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 11:30'),
    -- Room C meetings
    ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:00', '2024-10-01 10:00'),
    -- Overlaps with previous meeting.
    ('Room C', '2024-10-01 09:30', '2024-10-01 12:00');
```

If you’re interested in the solution to this puzzle, as well as the rest of the queries, check this GitHub repo.

The first takeaway from this blog post is that window functions are overpowered. Ever since I got more comfortable with using them, I feel that my queries have gotten so much simpler and easier to read, and I hope the same happens to you.

If you’re interested in learning more about them, you would probably enjoy reading this other blog post I’ve written, where I go over how you can understand and use them effectively.

The second takeaway is that these patterns used in the challenges really do happen in many other places. You might need to find sequences of subscriptions, customer retention, or you might need to find overlap of tasks. There are many situations when you will need to use window functions in a very similar fashion to what was done in the puzzles.

The third thing I want you to remember is about this solution to using events besides dealing with intervals. I’ve looked at some problems I solved a long time ago that I could’ve used this pattern on to make my life easier, and unfortunately, I didn’t know about it at the time.


I really do hope you enjoyed this post and gave a shot to the puzzles yourself. And I’m sure that if you made it this far, you either learned something new about SQL or strengthened your knowledge of window functions! 

Thank you so much for reading. If you have questions or just want to get in touch with me, don’t hesitate to contact me at mtrentz.com.

All images by the author unless stated otherwise.

Shape
Shape
Stay Ahead

Explore More Insights

Stay ahead with more perspectives on cutting-edge power, infrastructure, energy,  bitcoin and AI solutions. Explore these articles to uncover strategies and insights shaping the future of industries.

Shape

Tailscale expands from VPN into a full connectivity platform

DNS Filtering by Control D packages an existing integration into a single purchase. Control D is a DNS filtering service that blocks malicious, phishing, and unapproved domains before a device connects to them. The new add-on lets customers apply Control D’s filtering profiles directly through Tailscale’s own policy engine, by

Read More »

DOE Selects Community Partners to Receive Waste to Energy and Materials Recovery Technical Assistance

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels and Feedstocks Office (AFFO) and the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) have selected recipients for the FY26 Waste to Energy and Materials Technical Assistance program. Through this program, NLR will provide free guidance to state, local, and Tribal governments to use new technologies that turn waste into energy or recover valuable materials like critical minerals.  The program aims to help local officials create sensible solutions for their waste management issues, fill knowledge gaps, and plan and carry out implementation approaches that fit their communities. This year, the program has expanded to include additional municipal solid waste streams like electronics, industrial wastewater, and other byproducts.  Now in its sixth year, the technical assistance program has supported 67 entities in 31 states and territories. FY26 selections include: Community Name American Samoa Power Authority City of Boise, Idaho Cherokee Nation Natural Resources, Oklahoma Village of Coal Valley, Illinois Guam Energy Office Hudson Valley Regional Council, New York Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska Los Angeles County Public Works, California Metlakatla Indian Community, Arkansas Township of Montclair, New Jersey City of New Bedford, Massachusetts Oregon Department of Energy, Oregon South Central Regional Council of Governments, Connecticut Thompson Township, Pennsylvania Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency, New York Washington State Department of Commerce, Office of Renewable Fuels To learn more about the technical assistance program, visit NLR’s Waste to Energy and Materials Technical Assistance for State, Local, and Tribal Governments webpage. If you have questions, please see frequently asked questions or contact the Waste to Energy and Materials Technical Assistance Team.

Read More »

Santos targets Q4 2026 FID for Papua LNG plant

Santos Ltd. is on track to take fourth-quarter 2026 final investment decision (FID) on the 5.6 million tonne/year (tpy) Papua LNG plant at Caution Bay, Papua New Guinea, with project financing and government-led development discussions advancing. At plateau, Papua LNG would contribute about 1 million tpy of Santos equity LNG and roughly 11 million boe/year of equity oil, the company said in its first-half 2026 earnings report and call. Papua LNG would use 4 million tpy of production from new electric liquefaction trains and as much as 2 million tpy of tolling production from ExxonMobil Corp.’s already operating 8-million tpy PNG LNG plant, in which Santos is also a partner. Santos recently took FID on its PNG LNG oil infill drilling campaign, and expects to start drilling fourth-quarter 2026. Santos said it has several options to backfill PNG LNG production if Papua LNG does not proceed but emphasized that all parties remain focused on reaching a Papua LNG FID this year. The company cited Muruk, P’nyang, and Usano as possible resources for such backfill. Muruk has estimated natural gas resources of 1-3 tcf and P’nyang estimated recoverable reserves of 4.36 tcf. Usano, in the PD-L2 production license area, is primarily an oil project, with an estimated 85 million bbl of oil in place but would produce associated gas as well. Santos plans to drill a test well on it in early 2028. TotalEnergies SE holds 40.1% interest in Papua LNG and it the project’s operator. ExxonMobil holds 37.1% interest, with Santos and the state holding the bulk of the balance. Santos equity is 17.7-22.8% depending on government exercise of its back-in rights. ENEOS (formerly JX Nippon) holds a minor participating interest.

Read More »

North American rig count drops 8 units, erasing last week’s gain

The rig count in North America is down 8 units this week, according to data from Baker Huges Inc. With 804 rigs running across North America for the week ended Aug. 21, the drop erased the previous week’s 8-unit gain. There were 5 fewer rigs drilling in the US this week for a total of 588. The count is 50 more than were drilling during the same period last year. A 2-unit drop in offshore rigs left 10 working this week. One fewer rig was drilling in inland waters, leaving 2 still working. The number of rigs drilling on land decreased by 2 to 576. That count is up 53 from the same period in 2025. Three fewer rigs were oil-directed in the US and its waters this week for a total of 452. There were 127 gas-directed rigs working, down one from last week. The number of unclassified rigs working this week decreased by 1 unit to 9. Of the major US oil and gas producing states, Texas saw the largest increase. Four rigs were added to the state’s total this week to bring the count to 281, 41 more than were drilling during the same period last year. New Mexico and Louisiana each dropped 3 rigs to end the week with counts of 96 and 35, respectively. Wyoming’s rig count fell by a single unit this week to leave 9 rigs working. The overall rig count in Canada fell by 3 units to 216. The count is up 36 units from this time a year ago. Of those 216 rigs working, 148 were drilling for oil, down 3 from last week. The number of gas-directed rigs in Canada was unchanged at 65. Three units were unclassified, unchanged from last week.

Read More »

Ring’s 2027 target: 10% growth for 10% less

Boosted by an increase in horizontal drilling across its Central Basin Platform (CBP) operations, the leaders of Ring Energy Inc., The Woodlands, Tex., expect a big pop in the company’s 2027 financials. Speaking Aug. 18 at the EnerCom Denver conference, chairman and chief executive officer Paul McKinney said the Permian basin-focused operator has “an incredible runway of high-return opportunities” in the CBP using technologies refined by operators in the Midland and Delaware basins on either side of Ring’s holdings. Recent developments, he said, have made it easier for Ring and others active in the CBP, which has shallower reservoirs, to drill longer wells. Two years ago, half of the wells Ring drilled were horizontal. This year, that figure is on pace to be 81%. The length of new wells is similarly shifting to being at least 1.5 miles: In 2024, new wells of that length accounted for only 5% of Ring’s activity but that will be 70% this year. Those advancements are set to create a big payoff for Ring, which had total production of just under 20,000 boe/d in the second quarter. “The capital is kind of the story,” McKinney told EnerCom attendees. “We believe that we will deliver 10% production growth for 10% less capital in 2027 […] All this means meaningful upside in adjusted free cash flow. It means a significant increase in earnings.”

Read More »

Federal judge allows Sable Offshore to continue California pipeline operations

Despite affirming the jurisdictional shift, Wilson also ordered Sable to pay $1.5 million for violating a federal consent decree. Through its acquisition of the assets, Sable assumed obligations under the decree, including management and reporting requirements and provisions requiring state waivers before restarting operations. “Sable has violated the express provisions of the consent decree, without justification,” Wilson wrote. The judge said California’s proposed injunction “is not the proper remedy.” For one, he said, “the consent decree has been modified to replace OSFM as the regulatory authority with PHMSA, and the pre-restart requirements of the State Waivers are no longer applicable. Nor, too, are OSFM’s approval of a Restart Plan or authorization. PHMSA, the current regulator, has authorized Sable to restart the pipeline. Therefore, Sable is no longer in violation of the Consent Decree, and proactive, injunctive relief is inappropriate,” Wilson wrote. “Rather, the appropriate penalty for Sable’s violations is dictated by the consent decree.” Sable resumed transporting crude oil from the Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) through SYPS in March under the DPA order. The order and company statements indicate gross oil throughput is expected to reach about 50,000 b/d following ramp-up. Current production from six wells is estimated at about 6,000 b/d. SYPS has capacity of up to 200,000 b/d.

Read More »

US threatens sanctions against countries, companies buying Iranian oil

@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Inter:wght@100..900&display=swap’); .ebm-page__main h1, .ebm-page__main h2, .ebm-page__main h3, .ebm-page__main h4, .ebm-page__main h5, .ebm-page__main h6 { font-family: Inter; } body { line-height: 150%; letter-spacing: 0.025em; } button, .ebm-button-wrapper { font-family: Inter; } .label-style { text-transform: uppercase; color: var(–color-grey); font-weight: 600; font-size: 0.75rem; } .caption-style { font-size: 0.75rem; opacity: .6; } #onetrust-pc-sdk [id*=btn-handler], #onetrust-pc-sdk [class*=btn-handler] { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-policy a, #onetrust-pc-sdk a, #ot-pc-content a { color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-sdk .ot-active-menu { border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-accept-btn-handler, #onetrust-banner-sdk #onetrust-reject-all-handler, #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-btn-handler.cookie-setting-link { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk .onetrust-pc-btn-handler { color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Aug. 24 threatened secondary sanctions on any nation or entity maintaining economic ties with Iran, including buying its oil. He specifically warned Tehran’s trading partners (China, Turkey, and the UAE) to sever economic links or face direct US financial retaliation.  The Treasury plan, Operation Economic Outcast, does not immediately impose the secondary sanctions; it was framed as a deadline-driven warning to give violators time to comply. Bessent said President Trump was already contacting world leaders to request formal cooperation in isolating Tehran in hopes of ending the 6-month-plus old war. The sanctions package continues to crack down the ‘shadow fleet’ by expanding tracking and blacklisting the oil tankers, shipping insurers, and others that help smuggle Iranian crude. It also targets financial intermediaries that help channel oil sales into usable revenues. China, the largest buyer of Iranian crude oil, issued a formal order directing Chinese companies to disregard US sanctions. China purchases 80-90% of Iran’s exported oil. Beijing also vowed to take all “necessary measures” to defend its energy security and trading rights.

Read More »

AMD Helios Takes AI Infrastructure Fight to Rack Scale

AMD is escalating its challenge to Nvidia with Helios, a rack-scale AI system that puts the company squarely into the race to define how the next generation of AI factories are built. Unveiled in production form at AMD’s Advancing AI 2026 event in San Francisco, Helios combines 72 Instinct MI455X GPUs with sixth-generation EPYC “Venice” CPUs, Pensando networking and AMD’s ROCm software stack. The significance goes beyond another generation of faster accelerators. Like Nvidia’s Vera Rubin platform, Helios treats the rack as an integrated compute system in which GPUs, CPUs, memory, networking, power delivery and cooling increasingly have to be engineered together. For data center operators, that means the competitive battle between the two chip companies is moving directly into infrastructure design. AMD said Helios is now in production, with deployments beginning during the second half of 2026. The Rack Becomes the System Helios is built around AMD’s Instinct MI455X, a liquid-cooled accelerator based on the company’s CDNA 5 architecture and equipped with HBM4 memory. A complete Helios rack delivers 72 GPUs along with EPYC host CPUs and Pensando networking for front-end, scale-up and scale-out traffic. AMD is positioning the platform for both large-scale training and increasingly important inference workloads. AMD says Helios can deliver up to 30% more inference tokens per dollar than a competing system. The company also claims the MI455X provides more peak AI compute and substantially greater memory capacity than Nvidia’s Rubin GPU. Those numbers are AMD benchmarks rather than independent comparisons. But the larger architecture may matter more than the percentages. AI infrastructure is rapidly moving beyond the model of servers being installed as largely independent pieces of IT equipment. Accelerators have to exchange enormous volumes of data with each other while CPUs orchestrate workloads and networking connects increasingly large clusters across rows, halls and

Read More »

Moses Lake Moves From Bitcoin to AI and HPC

Moses Lake and the Quincy Effect Moses Lake should not be understood as an isolated rural data center project. It sits within the larger Grant County infrastructure ecosystem that helped make nearby Quincy one of the defining hyperscale markets of the cloud era. Keel has called Moses Lake “adjacent to one of the most proven data center markets in the United States,” noting that hyperscale infrastructure has operated around Quincy for nearly two decades. In its Q1 remarks, management argued that increasingly constrained regional power leaves operators seeking incremental Pacific Northwest capacity with fewer options. The Grant County Economic Development Council’s data center inventory includes Microsoft, NTT Data, Sabey, Vantage, Intuit and other operators. The organization counts more than 1.5 million square feet of data center operations in the county and points to a diverse fiber network and Grant County PUD’s Columbia River hydroelectric resources as core advantages. That existing cluster changes the equation for an 18-MW project. The headline AI developments of 2026 are increasingly measured in hundreds of megawatts or gigawatts. But another market exists underneath those megacampus announcements: operators that need tens of megawatts in the right geography on a timeline measured in quarters rather than many years. An 18-MW facility with power, fiber, equipment and construction underway can therefore be strategically more relevant than its relatively modest capacity suggests. Keel had previously secured an option for another 10 MW near Moses Lake, but management said during its second-quarter call that it has relinquished that option and is now focused exclusively on the existing 18 MW. The decision further distinguishes Moses Lake from the industry’s race to advertise ever-larger pipelines. This project is about getting capacity online. A Second Life for Crypto Power That may ultimately be the larger Moses Lake story. Bitcoin miners assembled portfolios around

Read More »

ISE Expo 2026: DCF Takes Stage with JLL, TIA

AI Infrastructure’s New Calculus: Speed, Quality and the Race to Revenue NASHVILLE — The defining question in data center development has become brutally simple: How quickly can a site get to revenue? Power availability sits at the center of that calculation. But as AI pushes development into new geographies and compresses construction schedules, an increasingly complicated set of infrastructure dependencies sits behind the megawatts — equipment, suppliers, construction capacity, fiber, optical connectivity, workforce and the quality systems needed to make all of it work reliably. That tension framed a Data Center Frontier-led fireside discussion at EndeavorB2B’s ISE Expo 2026 between Sean Farney, Vice President of Data Center Strategy at JLL, and Dave Stehlin, CEO of the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA). The conversation began with a new data center quality initiative. It quickly expanded into something larger: an examination of what happens when time to revenue becomes the organizing principle for an entire infrastructure industry. “There is absolutely, positively no room for pause right now,” Farney said. DCE 9000 Meets the AI Buildout For TIA, the answer begins with a problem Google brought to the association last year. According to Stehlin, Google was seeing recurring quality and delivery problems among operational technology suppliers — the companies providing equipment such as generators, cooling systems and other physical infrastructure required to make a data center operate. TIA responded by developing DCE 9000, or Data Center Excellence 9000, a third-party-certifiable quality management standard for the data center infrastructure supply chain. Stehlin said more than 70 companies are now participating in the effort, ranging from hyperscalers and data center operators to major infrastructure manufacturers. The first draft is expected in September. That is an unusually compressed development cycle for an industry standard. “Typically standards take five years to get implemented,” Stehlin said. “In nine months, we’re

Read More »

The Phantom Data Center Effect: When Perception Precedes Project Reality

Moving Beyond Speculation The answer is not simply earlier marketing campaigns or more aggressive public relations programs. Effective engagement requires understanding local concerns, motivations and political dynamics—and recognizing when community opposition reflects a durable constraint rather than a communications problem. We need to realize when no means no, and not interpret it as “try harder.” Phantom perception also can’t be handled by any one operator in any one market; this must be a collective, such as a crowd-sourced data platform, market by market. What our industry needs are clearer frameworks for evaluating digital infrastructure against these additional community-readiness criteria, because speculation is increasingly filling information gaps before formal projects reach the public process. Organizations such as OIX have begun working toward that objective. Its Digital Infrastructure Framework is modeled on traditional master planning and is intended to help communities evaluate what infrastructure they have, what they need and what they want as they plan for future technology requirements. The framework includes assessment criteria spanning investment readiness, policy, risk, sustainability and resilience. Greater transparency can narrow the gap between perception and reality. But greater transparency will not eliminate speculation, and unfortunately, it also won’t eliminate fear. Large infrastructure projects have always attracted public interest and scrutiny, and data centers are unlikely to become invisible again as AI demand accelerates. The question is how the industry responds to that visibility. The Next Stage of Data Center Development Community reaction to perceived data center development represents another potential source of site-selection intelligence. If communities begin reacting to a project before a developer has formally advanced one, that response can offer an early indication of whether a market is receptive to large-scale digital infrastructure or already approaching its political limit. This gives operators and investors another axis to measure: not just megawatts, fiber routes,

Read More »

Corvex Tests a Faster Path to Liquid-Cooled AI Infrastructure

The customer agreement expanded an earlier commitment and includes dedicated high-speed storage and CPUs in addition to GPUs. Corvex initially delivered capacity during the first quarter and continued deployment through the second and third quarters. By its Aug. 14 earnings update, the company said the multi-year Blackwell agreement had been fully delivered. Corvex reported approximately $22 million in contracted annualized recurring revenue from compute that was live and accepted by customers. The expansion was financed through debt, customer prepayments and cash on hand rather than additional equity issuance. But the most noteworthy aspect of the project may be the deployment itself. Corvex installed high-density, liquid-cooled NVIDIA HGX B200 systems inside an existing air-cooled data center and says it commissioned the capacity approximately two weeks after the equipment arrived. Instead of rebuilding the facility around a central liquid-cooling system, Corvex worked with Lenovo to use Lenovo Neptune liquid-to-air cooling technology. Liquid removes heat from the servers and transfers it to the existing air-cooled facility infrastructure. The cluster uses Lenovo ThinkSystem systems equipped with NVIDIA HGX B200 GPUs, NVIDIA Quantum-2 QM9700 InfiniBand for GPU traffic, NVIDIA Spectrum SN5600 switches for storage networking and SN2201 switches for management traffic. Corvex says the design allowed it to place high-density Blackwell infrastructure into the existing facility without a conventional facility-wide liquid-cooling conversion. Lenovo, in a case study of the deployment, contrasts the approximately two-week commissioning period with what it describes as typical data center upgrade timelines of seven to 12 months or more. That has significance beyond a single cluster. Power availability and suitable data center capacity increasingly constrain GPU deployment. If the approach proves repeatable, liquid-to-air cooling could allow some existing air-cooled facilities with sufficient power and other supporting infrastructure to accommodate higher-density AI systems without first undergoing a full central liquid-cooling conversion. For

Read More »

CBRE: Record Data Center Construction Fails to Ease Capacity Crunch

The North American data center industry built at record scale during the first half of 2026. It still wasn’t enough to loosen the market. Primary-market supply increased 33.7% year over year to a record 10,903 MW, according to CBRE’s newly released North America Data Center Trends H1 2026. Yet vacancy moved in the opposite direction, falling from 1.6% a year earlier to another record low of 1.4%. Net absorption reached 1,456.2 MW, up 11.7%, as hyperscale cloud and AI infrastructure operators continued competing for increasingly scarce blocks of contiguous power and capacity. Construction climbed 24.8% to a record 7,481.1 MW, surpassing the previous peak of 6,350.1 MW set in the second half of 2024. Perhaps the most telling number in the report is 80.4%. That is the share of primary-market capacity under construction that has already been preleased, up from 74.3% a year ago. CBRE estimates that less than 1,500 MW of all capacity currently under construction remains available—roughly six months of demand at the current absorption rate. The resulting picture is less one of a construction shortage than a race between infrastructure delivery and an AI demand curve that keeps absorbing capacity before it reaches the market. And increasingly, CBRE argues, securing the megawatts is only part of that race. Power, Permitting and Local Approval Converge Power availability and infrastructure delivery timelines remain the primary determinants of where data centers can be built. But CBRE’s H1 report places another constraint alongside them: community acceptance. “Local opposition has also become a serious obstacle,” the report states, with community resistance, zoning disputes and entitlement delays increasingly capable of stopping projects even after developers identify viable power and fiber. CBRE goes further in its outlook, describing community engagement as a development constraint now “on par with power procurement.” In practical site-selection terms,

Read More »

Microsoft will invest $80B in AI data centers in fiscal 2025

And Microsoft isn’t the only one that is ramping up its investments into AI-enabled data centers. Rival cloud service providers are all investing in either upgrading or opening new data centers to capture a larger chunk of business from developers and users of large language models (LLMs).  In a report published in October 2024, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated that demand for generative AI would push Microsoft, AWS, Google, Oracle, Meta, and Apple would between them devote $200 billion to capex in 2025, up from $110 billion in 2023. Microsoft is one of the biggest spenders, followed closely by Google and AWS, Bloomberg Intelligence said. Its estimate of Microsoft’s capital spending on AI, at $62.4 billion for calendar 2025, is lower than Smith’s claim that the company will invest $80 billion in the fiscal year to June 30, 2025. Both figures, though, are way higher than Microsoft’s 2020 capital expenditure of “just” $17.6 billion. The majority of the increased spending is tied to cloud services and the expansion of AI infrastructure needed to provide compute capacity for OpenAI workloads. Separately, last October Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said his company planned total capex spend of $75 billion in 2024 and even more in 2025, with much of it going to AWS, its cloud computing division.

Read More »

John Deere unveils more autonomous farm machines to address skill labor shortage

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More Self-driving tractors might be the path to self-driving cars. John Deere has revealed a new line of autonomous machines and tech across agriculture, construction and commercial landscaping. The Moline, Illinois-based John Deere has been in business for 187 years, yet it’s been a regular as a non-tech company showing off technology at the big tech trade show in Las Vegas and is back at CES 2025 with more autonomous tractors and other vehicles. This is not something we usually cover, but John Deere has a lot of data that is interesting in the big picture of tech. The message from the company is that there aren’t enough skilled farm laborers to do the work that its customers need. It’s been a challenge for most of the last two decades, said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere, in a briefing. Much of the tech will come this fall and after that. He noted that the average farmer in the U.S. is over 58 and works 12 to 18 hours a day to grow food for us. And he said the American Farm Bureau Federation estimates there are roughly 2.4 million farm jobs that need to be filled annually; and the agricultural work force continues to shrink. (This is my hint to the anti-immigration crowd). John Deere’s autonomous 9RX Tractor. Farmers can oversee it using an app. While each of these industries experiences their own set of challenges, a commonality across all is skilled labor availability. In construction, about 80% percent of contractors struggle to find skilled labor. And in commercial landscaping, 86% of landscaping business owners can’t find labor to fill open positions, he said. “They have to figure out how to do

Read More »

2025 playbook for enterprise AI success, from agents to evals

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for enterprise AI. The past year has seen rapid innovation, and this year will see the same. This has made it more critical than ever to revisit your AI strategy to stay competitive and create value for your customers. From scaling AI agents to optimizing costs, here are the five critical areas enterprises should prioritize for their AI strategy this year. 1. Agents: the next generation of automation AI agents are no longer theoretical. In 2025, they’re indispensable tools for enterprises looking to streamline operations and enhance customer interactions. Unlike traditional software, agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can make nuanced decisions, navigate complex multi-step tasks, and integrate seamlessly with tools and APIs. At the start of 2024, agents were not ready for prime time, making frustrating mistakes like hallucinating URLs. They started getting better as frontier large language models themselves improved. “Let me put it this way,” said Sam Witteveen, cofounder of Red Dragon, a company that develops agents for companies, and that recently reviewed the 48 agents it built last year. “Interestingly, the ones that we built at the start of the year, a lot of those worked way better at the end of the year just because the models got better.” Witteveen shared this in the video podcast we filmed to discuss these five big trends in detail. Models are getting better and hallucinating less, and they’re also being trained to do agentic tasks. Another feature that the model providers are researching is a way to use the LLM as a judge, and as models get cheaper (something we’ll cover below), companies can use three or more models to

Read More »

OpenAI’s red teaming innovations define new essentials for security leaders in the AI era

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More OpenAI has taken a more aggressive approach to red teaming than its AI competitors, demonstrating its security teams’ advanced capabilities in two areas: multi-step reinforcement and external red teaming. OpenAI recently released two papers that set a new competitive standard for improving the quality, reliability and safety of AI models in these two techniques and more. The first paper, “OpenAI’s Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems,” reports that specialized teams outside the company have proven effective in uncovering vulnerabilities that might otherwise have made it into a released model because in-house testing techniques may have missed them. In the second paper, “Diverse and Effective Red Teaming with Auto-Generated Rewards and Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning,” OpenAI introduces an automated framework that relies on iterative reinforcement learning to generate a broad spectrum of novel, wide-ranging attacks. Going all-in on red teaming pays practical, competitive dividends It’s encouraging to see competitive intensity in red teaming growing among AI companies. When Anthropic released its AI red team guidelines in June of last year, it joined AI providers including Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, and even the U.S.’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which all had released red teaming frameworks. Investing heavily in red teaming yields tangible benefits for security leaders in any organization. OpenAI’s paper on external red teaming provides a detailed analysis of how the company strives to create specialized external teams that include cybersecurity and subject matter experts. The goal is to see if knowledgeable external teams can defeat models’ security perimeters and find gaps in their security, biases and controls that prompt-based testing couldn’t find. What makes OpenAI’s recent papers noteworthy is how well they define using human-in-the-middle

Read More »