Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Asami: Datomic-Like Graph Database

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–9 of 9 posts

Re: Asami: Datomic-Like Graph Database

#4

Post by Scarbutt »

For CRUD stuff I have found datomic to be hard to maintain if your domain demands lots of attributes (even if trying to be as generic as possible), you need discipline (good docs) and lots of application code for checks and to force constraints. In sql/rdbms world you have all the atrributes nicely organized(within tables) with good check/constraints available at hand (waits for easy vs simple comment).

With datomic you get fleixble schema but at a high cost IMO.

Re: Asami: Datomic-Like Graph Database

#5

Post by souenzzo »

Scarbutt wrote: post #4

For CRUD stuff I have found datomic to be hard to maintain if your domain demands lots of attributes (even if trying to be as generic as possible), you need discipline (good docs) and lots of application code for checks and to force constraints. In sql/rdbms world you have all the atrributes nicely organized(within tables) with good check/constraints available at hand (waits for easy vs simple comment). With datomic…

Not sure if you are talking about use datomic or about NOT use ORM

Re: Asami: Datomic-Like Graph Database

#6

Post by nnq »

Scarbutt wrote: post #4

For CRUD stuff I have found datomic to be hard to maintain if your domain demands lots of attributes (even if trying to be as generic as possible), you need discipline (good docs) and lots of application code for checks and to force constraints. In sql/rdbms world you have all the atrributes nicely organized(within tables) with good check/constraints available at hand (waits for easy vs simple comment). With datomic…

> you get fleixble schema but at a high cost

You could say the same thing about mongo or any other nosql document-db...

Re: Asami: Datomic-Like Graph Database

#7

Post by Scarbutt »

nnq wrote: post #6
Scarbutt wrote: post #4

For CRUD stuff I have found datomic to be hard to maintain if your domain demands lots of attributes (even if trying to be as generic as possible), you need discipline (good docs) and lots of application code for checks and to force constraints. In sql/rdbms world you have all the atrributes nicely organized(within tables) with good check/constraints available at hand (waits for easy vs simple comment). With datomic…

> you get fleixble schema but at a high cost You could say the same thing about mongo or any other nosql document-db...

Mongo moves your schema entirely to the application, in datomic you have to define your attributes (columns) before hand (enabling some constraints, like uniqueness and value types) but its up to the app to group them however you want (no tables), they called it the universal schema, it also enforces acids semantics. So is not as bad as mongo for structured and relational data.
Post reply on HN