Live data from Hacker News

Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

feldera.com

1–10 of 140 posts

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#2
> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common.

Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#3

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

[dead]

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#4

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

Hi, I'm the author of the article.

As to your hard disagree, I guess it depends... While this particular user is on the higher end (in terms of columns), it's not our only user where column counts are huge. We see tables with 100+ columns on a fairly regular basis especially when dealing with larger enterprises.

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#5

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

I saw tables with more than a thousand columns. It was a law firm home-grown FileMaker tool. Didn't inspect it too closely, so don't know what was inside

I remember a phrase from one of C. J. Date's books: every record is a logical statement. It really stood out for me and I keep returning to it. Such an understanding implies a rather small number of fields or the logical complexity will go through the roof.

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#6

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

It might not be common in typical software shops. I work in manufacturing and our database has multiple tables with hundreds of columns.

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#7

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

It might not be common in typical software shops. I work in manufacturing and our database has multiple tables with hundreds of columns.

What's in them?

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#8

> But SQL schemas often look like this. Columns are nullable by default, and wide tables are common. Hard disagree. That database table was a waving red flag. I don't know enough/any rust so don't really understand the rest of the article but I have never in my life worked with a database table that had 700 columns. Or even 100.

https://jimmyhmiller.com/ugliest-beautiful-codebase

Re: Nobody ever got fired for using a struct

#10

Why not use a struct of arrays? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-oriented_design

> Why not use a struct of arrays?

I would assume because then the shape of the data would be too different? SOAs is super effective when it suits the shape of the data. Here, the difference would be the difference between an OLTP and OLAP DB. And you wouldn't use an OLAP for an OLTP workload?

Post reply on HN