9 ms·
See, the problem is that RDBMS's and SQL seem to be more complex than the problem you're applying them to, so it seems like there must be a more straightforward
by commandlinefan 6y ago
See, the problem is that RDBMS's and SQL seem to be more complex than the problem you're applying them to, so it seems like there must be a more straightforward solution. However, as of 2020, every shallow attempt to replace them with something simpler has suffered from the "hidden" problems that you don't realize you have until you try to live without an actual database.
- lmm 6y agoNot my experience at all. I'm working at a company that makes a great product while avoiding SQL RDBMSes for its main datastore; some of my previous companies did the same thing as well. No datastore can save you from having to understand your dataflow, but if you skip the RDBMS and the SQL you can avoid a lot of unnecessary overhead.