3 ms·
Welll, yes I think the case is proven for MongoDB and the like, but is the author beating up on the easy ones? Some examples that come to mind: - Postgres. My
by banku_brougham 9y ago
Welll, yes I think the case is proven for MongoDB and the like, but is the author beating up on the easy ones?
Some examples that come to mind:
- Postgres. MySQL is great but was eventually obtained by Oracle with a questionable open source future. I think they both originated long ago and evolved in parallel. I wish author would weigh in on which should not have been developed.
- Julia is a new dynamic language that intends to perform with speeds like C. But shouldn't we stick with python because that is the current standard? Wait though, the author says Python is just the same as javascript, ruby, and PHP. PHP was first, so I guess I should be doing my data science in PHP?
I think languages and ecosystems are more analagous to companies/enterprises. They evolve, arise, and die out. Some succeed.
- alexandercrohde 9y ago[Author] I'll weigh in- MySql, Postgresql [and the other major players] should all leverage the same standardized syntax (they're close, but not drop-in replacements). In this case when one gets acquired the switching cost is 0. In fact, if they follow the same query contract you could database-dump from one to the other. Which one shouldn't have existed? Whichiver came second, I suppose. I don't understand why the authors between the two wouldn't cooperate and build one open-source system and fork it if it got acquired.