3 ms·
Huh, how views can differ... I think SQL/PGQ have the potential to outright kill the whole field of PG databases (if/once existing databases actually start imp
by hobofan 4y ago
Huh, how views can differ...
I think SQL/PGQ have the potential to outright kill the whole field of PG databases (if/once existing databases actually start implementing it).
The big marketing claim of Neo4J & friends has always been that they make graph queries possible, with a big portion of that claim being that those queries would be intractable for RDBMs performance-wise.
With SQL/PGQ it becomes quite apparent that there is next to no magic sauce in PG databases and that it's all just syntactic sugar on top of node/vertex tables. All the rest of their query plans looks 1:1 what you'll find in a RDBMs. Now that they are on a level playing field query syntax-wise, PG databases will have to compete against RDBMs with a lot more advanced query optimizers, better administrative tooling etc..
- solidangle 4y agoThis is my expectation as well. At CIDR this year there was a paper that presented an implementation of SQL/PGQ in DuckDB, and it outperforms Neo4J in a few selected benchmarks [1]. [1] https://www.cidrdb.org/cidr2023/papers/p66-wolde.pdf https://www.cidrdb.org/cidr2023/papers/p66-wolde.pdf