3 ms·
I'm well open to correction on this, since I've not much of a clue, but with all this ORM back-and-forth, and relational databases, why do we not see more usage
by FuzzyDunlop 14y ago
I'm well open to correction on this, since I've not much of a clue, but with all this ORM back-and-forth, and relational databases, why do we not see more usage of graph databases?[1] From the wiki, it says they map more directly to OO applications. Is there a reason relational databases are still used by default?
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_database http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_database
- nknight 14y agoInertia, accidents of history. Relational databases had obviously-useful properties at critical points in the history of mass commercial adoption of computing. As a practical, real-world matter, "object-oriented programming" barely existed during the rise of relational in the 70s, making the practical problems caused by the impedance mismatch either non-obvious or seemingly unimportant. As a result, huge investments were made in advancing relational databases, and other forms have languished. Today, relational maintains the substantial advantages of maturity and installed base. Performance, reliability, general polish, ease of access to support/tutorials/other literature, and general status as "the way things are done".
- biafra 14y agoSometimes the reason is that operations is used to it.