amz_author_media

As per the provided XML data for amz_author_media, it has four defined fields - id, created_at, author_id, and media_url_id. “Id” is a unique identifier for each record in the table. The “created_at” field represents the date and time when the record was created. Moreover, there is an “author_id” field which refers to the primary key of related records in a second table, indicating the author who owns the media content associated with it. Lastly, the “media_url_id” describes the primary key for the related media content where the user can find more information about the image used within the record’s message.

It is worth noting that the fields and their definitions could vary, depending on the version of the XML data or any subsequent updates to the schema.

Consider a scenario in which some records from an Amazon Medium API client are being handled. This server keeps track of three tables: user activity table (with id fields), author table (with linked record author_id) and image uploads (with id fields). Unfortunately, due to a system fault, one of the data points was switched in the XML format.

The rules of the puzzle are as follows:

1. Each record can have at most one record linked as an author and associated with other images
2. All user records must match the “id”, “created_at” order of the original data. Meaning, the server maintains order for both authors - new records by a given author cannot be placed before records created on that day. On the flipside, new image uploads always follow the same date pattern as the users they are linked with
3. Some images were deleted from this server and replaced by newer ones which are in their original sequence, but some still exist.

Question: Given the aforementioned scenario, if you find out on a certain day that multiple user records existed for the ‘id’ 12345, how can you distinguish between two possible types of issues - either the system was corrupt and all images/authors were deleted before the current date or the image uploads happened after the records were created?

First off, check if any images which are supposed to belong with id 12345 still exist in an uploaded state. The server maintains a chronological sequence for image uploads, so if there’s no record of such images being moved since their original uploads, it means that these are related but unlinked, meaning they were probably deleted from the server before it was corrupted

If records of some user with ID 12345 have been linked as authors, this indicates either the corruption of data or a manual error. The reason could be deduced if newer images for a particular day exist despite no evidence of such new records being created post-that date by checking other related tables like “image uploads”

If we can’t find any new images following the id 12345 on specific dates then the corruption of data is likely because otherwise, according to our rule three, one must have at least one link for each image. As such, manual intervention should be made to restore the records.