121–130 of 310 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP probably means not worrying about instances, scaling or over/under provisioning etc, just service usage at a more fine grained level.. more like Spanner
Exactly. I don't want to care about the server or the hardware or the OS. Just give me a database with tables and standard SQL querying capabilities and performance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is so much wrong with this post I don’t know where to start Old school sql replication is awful. It’s awful in Postgres (single threaded replay? A single vacuum can make your slaves fall behind). It’s awful in MySQL (go ahead and tell me how you do dual master without rewriting your app). People use nosql not because it’s eady or flawless, but because doing it with sql is an order of magnitude harder. Go ahead…
You got downvoted, but I agree with you. Traditional RDBMS is inherently single-node and a pain to scale. The actual sad thing here is that there's no mature/reliable commodity (i.e. open source) distributed RDBMS for transaction processing yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It only left in terms of attention from startups I suppose. I also disagree with the reason the article suggested - SQL could not handle the loads. My opinion is that startups simply liked the idea of not having a schema as it fit their agile approach. So, they went NoSQL because it allowed them to get going faster and change easier.
That, and they like to believe they need to scale like Facebook.
If SQL is to databases as Javascript is to browsers — ubiquitous and largely standard across the market — are there any languages that transpile to SQL? People in this thread have commented that SQL is clunky, and JS definitely fit that description for a while. So I'm wondering if there are any alternatives that would prove SQL's clunkiness to me.
I don't know about transpiling but I use SAS to work around SQL's clunkiness. I can embed SQL seamlessly into my SAS code so it works well. I use SQL for things that are simpler in SQL (selecting, filtering, aggregating data and "case when" statements etc) and I use SAS's data step language for when I have to do more complicated stuff with the data like Arrays, loops, macros, weighted averaging, time series based stuff and regressions.
The thing I love about SQL is it is the lowest common denominator for all of my organisations data it doesn't mater if data is stored in an Oracle table, a Microsoft SQL Server table, or even Access DB or spreadsheet. The language to extract/merge/join all the data is the same and standardized.
We also have things called "Data historians" which are basically time-series datastores (usually they are linked to PLC vendors) and nothing frustrates me more when they use some proprietary "sql like" language which seems similar to ANSI SQL except things like aggregations (SUM, AVG, MAX etc) don't work or they do weird things with data types (especially dates) or similar everyone of these seem to be subtly different - annoying.
A bit surprised to find no mention of the GPU database field (ie: https://www.mapd.com/demos/ , etc) because straight SQL on this hardware is extremely fast when optimized. Feels like all this NoSQL stuff came around when developers no longer wanted to deal w/ DBAs and do full stack(s) on their own. DBAs spent long hours on DDL and DML (stored procedures) for a good reason.
There's really no such thing as NoSQL first of all. Relational, graph, key/value (including wide column), document-store, etc. There are lots of database types but it turns out relational works 95% of the time and we're getting better at recognizing the use-cases for the others. SQL is also just a query language, that's literally the name. Any database can implement it, not just relational. Is SQL a great interface f…
If SQL is to databases as Javascript is to browsers — ubiquitous and largely standard across the market — are there any languages that transpile to SQL? People in this thread have commented that SQL is clunky, and JS definitely fit that description for a while. So I'm wondering if there are any alternatives that would prove SQL's clunkiness to me.
LINQ?
Most data is relational. If you put relational data in a NoSQL database you end up writing an API that is similar to SQL.
Most structured data is relational. If you include data like (someone else's) web site content, images, sound files, video files, etc, it's a different picture (pardon the pun).
Lol SQL is making a comeback? It never left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't honestly think many people have the kind of scale where this is a sensible trade-off to make.
Absolutely. Even a bigint / long sequence column so often feels a bit ridiculous.