5 ms·

There was a strong push for "NoSQL" about a decade ago, but it got marred by document databases trying to usurp relational databases around the same time. When

There was a strong push for "NoSQL" about a decade ago, but it got marred by document databases trying to usurp relational databases around the same time. When people realized they chose the wrong tool for the job (that is, the document database), they were happy to return to their relational databases using SQL. That completely killed any momentum that had been built to replace SQL with different languages.

zozbot234 5y ago
The author seems to think that putting structured data in columns is a good idea. That is pretty clearly contrary to the basics of the relational model itself, never mind SQL. In fact it's quite close to how document databases work, so a very NoSQLish proposal overall.
- fauigerzigerk 5y ago
  >That is pretty clearly contrary to the basics of the relational model itself The consensus among relational theorists appears to be that data types can be arbitrarily complex. For instance, C.J Date and Hugh Darwen write the following ([1] page 56): Third, we remind you that types are not limited to simple things like integers. Indeed, we saw in Chapter 1 that values and variables can be arbitrarily complex—and that is so precisely because the types of those values and variables can be arbitrarily complex. Thus, to paraphrase a remark from that chapter, a type might consist of geometric points, or polygons, or X rays, or XML documents, or fingerprints, or arrays, or stacks, or lists, or relations (and on and on). [1] https://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/TTM/DTATRM.pdf https://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/TTM/DTATRM.pdf
  - LAC-Tech 5y ago
    Alright, JSON in RDBMS is now canon!
ahartmetz 5y ago
I don't think that NoSQL ever was about better query languages for relational databases. It was about making databases faster and easier to use by using simpler data models with fewer guarantees.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  And now that we can query JSON fields in PG we get the best of both world.
  - jjgreen 5y ago
    I like this (and use it) but it has to be said, the syntax is grim.
    - Semaphor 5y ago
      Same for MSSQL, all XML or JSON Syntax is very… unfun.
    - LAC-Tech 5y ago
      Still, I'd rather query JSON in postgres than do joins in mongo.
    - Izkata 5y ago
      For now. Next version (currently in beta) will support the usual [] syntax in queries: https://blog.crunchydata.com/blog/better-json-in-postgres-with-postgresql-14 https://blog.crunchydata.com/blog/better-json-in-postgres-wi...

zozbot234 5y ago

The author seems to think that putting structured data in columns is a good idea. That is pretty clearly contrary to the basics of the relational model itself, never mind SQL. In fact it's quite close to how document databases work, so a very NoSQLish proposal overall.

fauigerzigerk 5y ago
>That is pretty clearly contrary to the basics of the relational model itself The consensus among relational theorists appears to be that data types can be arbitrarily complex. For instance, C.J Date and Hugh Darwen write the following ([1] page 56): Third, we remind you that types are not limited to simple things like integers. Indeed, we saw in Chapter 1 that values and variables can be arbitrarily complex—and that is so precisely because the types of those values and variables can be arbitrarily complex. Thus, to paraphrase a remark from that chapter, a type might consist of geometric points, or polygons, or X rays, or XML documents, or fingerprints, or arrays, or stacks, or lists, or relations (and on and on). [1] https://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/TTM/DTATRM.pdf https://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/TTM/DTATRM.pdf
- LAC-Tech 5y ago
  Alright, JSON in RDBMS is now canon!

ahartmetz 5y ago

I don't think that NoSQL ever was about better query languages for relational databases. It was about making databases faster and easier to use by using simpler data models with fewer guarantees.

1337shadow 5y ago
And now that we can query JSON fields in PG we get the best of both world.
- jjgreen 5y ago
  I like this (and use it) but it has to be said, the syntax is grim.
  - Semaphor 5y ago
    Same for MSSQL, all XML or JSON Syntax is very… unfun.
  - LAC-Tech 5y ago
    Still, I'd rather query JSON in postgres than do joins in mongo.
  - Izkata 5y ago
    For now. Next version (currently in beta) will support the usual [] syntax in queries: https://blog.crunchydata.com/blog/better-json-in-postgres-with-postgresql-14 https://blog.crunchydata.com/blog/better-json-in-postgres-wi...