SQL: One of the most valuable skills

Post by nostrademons » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 12:42 AM UTC

tremon wrote: post #267

nostrademons wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends a lot on the actual access patterns of your data. Many recent web & mobile apps have a lot of screens where you just want to grab one blob of heterogenous data and format it with the UI toolkit of choice. Or if they do display multiple results, it's O(10) rather than O(1000) or O(1M). Chasing pointers is fine for use-cases like this, because you do it once and you have all the information you're looking for.…

Depends a lot on the actual access patterns of your data. Yup. Thing is: with RDBMSs you are in control of both the storage patterns and the access patterns of your data. That's where a large part of the performance benefit comes from. > 50% of features could get by with read-only datasets that supported only key/value lookup Did you implement a storage pattern that was ordered by key (or hash(key) if you used hashin…

Post by chillacy » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 7:06 AM UTC

dominotw wrote: post #124

chillacy wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understood when OP said the "concept of SQL" that they referred to a pretty broad idea of querying tabular data in rows and columns with some structured language.

I find it hard to accept that ppl are talking about 'querying tabular data in rows and columns with some structured language' when they talk about sql. They are surely talking about the specific syntax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL

Post by collyw » Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 9:50 AM UTC

GVIrish wrote: post #312

zzzcpan wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People behind NoSQL movement understand SQL better, than any people glorifying SQL here. In fact, I think this is a testament of how poorly most people actually understand SQL, they can't even see basic on the surface problems with it.

I think there are people who went with NoSQL because it fit their specific needs better than a regular RDBMS, and people who went NoSQL because they found it easier to work with than a RDBMS (at first). The latter group often didn't want to learn SQL and went with NoSQL's as a shortcut, not because they had an intimate understanding of the tradeoffs between the approaches and decided NoSQL was the better option.

Post by Ma8ee » Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 6:33 AM UTC

richpimp wrote: post #319

bonesss wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQL is wildly powerful and important, but it's also got clear deficiencies for data traversal and manipulation. I see it on a spectrum between declerative and imperative data structures, and where I think most people go wrong with it is trying to create a monolithic solution to a broad spectrum of problems. I think you need a graduated approach where each data layer is simplifying and satisfying the next, so you're u…

I can't agree more with this. As with anything we use in our applications, understanding and leveraging the strengths of our different tools is vitally important. If, for example, I needed a cartesian product of two datasets, SQL is the first thing that comes to mind due to how simple it is to write and the speed with which it will be processed in the database. On the flip side, I would never want to intermix fronten…

Post by richpimp » Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 4:16 PM UTC

Ma8ee wrote: post #387

richpimp wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't agree more with this. As with anything we use in our applications, understanding and leveraging the strengths of our different tools is vitally important. If, for example, I needed a cartesian product of two datasets, SQL is the first thing that comes to mind due to how simple it is to write and the speed with which it will be processed in the database. On the flip side, I would never want to intermix fronten…

I’ve seen queries returning html and JavaScript