4 ms·

I agree. I’ve seen people bashing SQL ever since I started using it 25 years ago, but I’ve yet to see an attempt to replace or supersede it succeed. Many of th

I agree. I’ve seen people bashing SQL ever since I started using it 25 years ago, but I’ve yet to see an attempt to replace or supersede it succeed. Many of these blog articles seem to be written by devs that have only really experienced the user-facing application side of things, and really don’t realise the sheer number of financial, analytic & business systems, that keep the world spinning round, that are all happily buzzing away using SQL. Moaning about JSON manipulation in SQL is madness. A client should use appropriate joins to get the data from the database & then do the transformation. Storing JSON when you actually need to perform operations on said data makes 0 sense. It’s a huge overhead, an utter nightmare to index etc.

dnautics 5y ago
> A client should use appropriate joins to get the data from the database & then do the transformation Please don't set up "object joins" against an object/key/value table. It's better to flatten the highly used bits of the json out into the table that hosts the "source json" as a blob in one column. There is a place in our codebase where someone did these "object joins", and it's a nightmare to work with. After about two months, there is a comment in one of the tests I found, "I really regret this pattern now". Now we have enough customer data in that object "kv table" that we can't migrate back to json + select flattened fields without extreme pain.