3 ms·
I think the problem is that we have a very weak understanding of "better" or "worse" or "use cases". What would a better database look like? Maybe it's faster,
by staticassertion 6y ago
I think the problem is that we have a very weak understanding of "better" or "worse" or "use cases". What would a better database look like? Maybe it's faster, or more stable, etc. But if what makes it better is that it is a better model, you end up with religious wars - it's the same reason why no one can really agree on whether a static or dynamic language will lead to "better" code, it's just too hard to tell.
As a user of KV stores and graphdbs myself I would have to use a traditional rdbms. It's been an absolute breath of fresh air being able to express queries in a graph-oriented way. For me the combination has been totally "better", but of course, that's not evidence based! Nor, really, could it be.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago> As a user of KV stores and graphdbs myself I would have to use a traditional rdbms. It's been an absolute breath of fresh air being able to express queries in a graph-oriented way. For me the combination has been totally "better", but of course, that's not evidence based! Nor, really, could it be. Well, it's anecdote. But if a statistically-significant number of people feel that it's "an absolute breath of fresh air", that's totally "better" in a very concrete sense.