I'd imagine the default error-handling behaviour of 9/10 Excel macros is to throw away data
I wonder how many bleeding edge master branches of GitHub repos, pulled in blindly by someone cobbling something together to meet a deadline, are running in places they probably shouldn't be.
It's not the fault of the original designer if he was clearly targetting a different purpose.
Lots of love for it in Rx
They probably mean a semi-automated process within excel, where each tab is a days extract or something similar and they are using external references to other sheets. In any vaguely up-to-date version of excel the way you would do this is via 'get and transform' which does not have any of these limitations (including the 1m record limit that the news article suggests).
The funny thing is that the latest versions of Excel are brilliant at aggregating and analyzing data and are more than suitable for this task if used correctly (i.e. using PowerQuery). It's just that way less than 1% of users are aware of this functionality - I would assume that even most hacker news readers probably don't know about PowerQuery/PowerPivot, writing M in excel and setting up data relationships e.t.c.
« PHE had set up an automatic process to pull this data together into Excel templates [...] When [the row limit] was reached, further cases were simply left off. »
The terrible thing here is dropping data rather than reporting an error and refusing to run.
It isn't clear what piece of software was behind this "automatic process".
Clearly the responsible humans are to blame.
If the software that dropped data rather than failing has that as its default behaviour, or is easily configured to do that, then I think that software (and its authors) are also to blame.
Is there anything in Excel itself that behaves like that?