5 ms·

All I want is an ordinary RDBMS with SPAAS (Stored Procedures as a Service) that return a binary blob of tables, nothing else. I don't want noSQL, I don't care

All I want is an ordinary RDBMS with SPAAS (Stored Procedures as a Service) that return a binary blob of tables, nothing else. I don't want noSQL, I don't care about cloud objects, I saw Firebase and didn't like it, I don't want JSON as a result, I don't care if noobs don't know who CODD is, they will learn it the hard way sooner or later. Oracle is the living god of RDBMS and they should take advantage of that yet they don't. It has nothing to do with AI, ML, NN, or any other word du jour, just plain tables lightning fast.

yanivleven 9y ago
Think they are looking for the next thing with #18c cause the are so late to the game they cant just be a faster AWS Me2 that wont do it
- tkyjonathan 9y ago
  Yaniv, they just leapfrogged everyone back into the game with an obvious large investment of R&D. Who invests in R&D these days anyway?
  - tatersolid 9y ago
    > Who invests in R&D these days anyway? Google, Microsoft and Amazon invest billions _per quarter_ in R&D.
danawint 9y ago
Totally agree! just make it work fast, I'll take care of the rest
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
j_s 9y ago
You can pay for managed hosting for commercial databases. What further requirements are you missing?
jondubois 9y ago
>> All I want is an ordinary RDBMS It doesn't matter what you want. Humans are no longer the customers; we are now the products and the slaves of machines. At least that's what the article makes it sound like.
mamcx 9y ago
I almost do this. My main APIs are POST/GET sqlite databases (ie: I build a sqlite db and return it like a file, then in clients and use it. Not using stupid JSON when I need long rows!). -- I'm dreaming about building a relational language and by the way build a RDBMS on top of maybe sqlite. I think exist a lot of potential for a relational store with more flexibility Think: with both in-memory and on-disk data storage, fixed schema (as normal) + dynamic (like JSON) + Flexible. By flexible I mean to use Union Types and return mixed rows: //A union of several schemas: Table Log = | Customer | Order | OrderLine SELECT Log = Customer(1,...). Customer(2,...) Order(1, ...) OrderLine(1, ...) Also, maybe allow to directly acces indexes (so a index is just a KV store!), to allow logical log manipulation, etc. In short, what about a relational-redis?
- dfox 9y ago
  Transferring whole sqlite databases makes sense when one side (usually the client) really uses the file as semi-persistent database for some non-trivial timespan (we actually do that for most of our mobile applications, usually for long-lived read only reference data, but one of our applications actually POSTs modified sqlite files back to server as part of normal operation, which is in fact mainly a hackish way to overcome memory limitations of the hardware involved). Using it only as data format for the transfer is hugely inefficient in terms of both time and bandwidth.
  - mamcx 9y ago
    Yes. That is why a better options is to have a kind of streamable relational format (a JSON for tables ?). The problem is that using sqlite it also embed a functional query engine, when a simple data format requiere extra layers to make it work. So even better is to have a sqlite-like engine that allow partial/streamable reading/writes.

yanivleven 9y ago

Think they are looking for the next thing with #18c cause the are so late to the game they cant just be a faster AWS Me2 that wont do it

tkyjonathan 9y ago
Yaniv, they just leapfrogged everyone back into the game with an obvious large investment of R&D. Who invests in R&D these days anyway?
- tatersolid 9y ago
  > Who invests in R&D these days anyway? Google, Microsoft and Amazon invest billions _per quarter_ in R&D.

danawint 9y ago

Totally agree! just make it work fast, I'll take care of the rest

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

j_s 9y ago

You can pay for managed hosting for commercial databases. What further requirements are you missing?

jondubois 9y ago

>> All I want is an ordinary RDBMS It doesn't matter what you want. Humans are no longer the customers; we are now the products and the slaves of machines. At least that's what the article makes it sound like.

mamcx 9y ago

I almost do this. My main APIs are POST/GET sqlite databases (ie: I build a sqlite db and return it like a file, then in clients and use it. Not using stupid JSON when I need long rows!). -- I'm dreaming about building a relational language and by the way build a RDBMS on top of maybe sqlite. I think exist a lot of potential for a relational store with more flexibility Think: with both in-memory and on-disk data storage, fixed schema (as normal) + dynamic (like JSON) + Flexible. By flexible I mean to use Union Types and return mixed rows: //A union of several schemas: Table Log = | Customer | Order | OrderLine SELECT Log = Customer(1,...). Customer(2,...) Order(1, ...) OrderLine(1, ...) Also, maybe allow to directly acces indexes (so a index is just a KV store!), to allow logical log manipulation, etc. In short, what about a relational-redis?

dfox 9y ago
Transferring whole sqlite databases makes sense when one side (usually the client) really uses the file as semi-persistent database for some non-trivial timespan (we actually do that for most of our mobile applications, usually for long-lived read only reference data, but one of our applications actually POSTs modified sqlite files back to server as part of normal operation, which is in fact mainly a hackish way to overcome memory limitations of the hardware involved). Using it only as data format for the transfer is hugely inefficient in terms of both time and bandwidth.
- mamcx 9y ago
  Yes. That is why a better options is to have a kind of streamable relational format (a JSON for tables ?). The problem is that using sqlite it also embed a functional query engine, when a simple data format requiere extra layers to make it work. So even better is to have a sqlite-like engine that allow partial/streamable reading/writes.