4 ms·
Does anyone know why they chose to make AQL diverge from SQL so much? As far as I can tell from a cursory glance, FOR -> SELECT, IN -> FROM, FILTER -> WHERE, S
by schmichael 12y ago
Does anyone know why they chose to make AQL diverge from SQL so much?
As far as I can tell from a cursory glance, FOR -> SELECT, IN -> FROM, FILTER -> WHERE, SORT -> ORDER BY.
Is there a reason the authors didn't use the more familiar SQL keywords?
- phpnode 12y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540960 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540960
- schmichael 12y ago> Because it's a graph database so it doesn't really fit naturally with SQL. Interesting, but lacking in details. The trivial examples I see in posts like this always seem to map perfectly to SQL.
- fceller 12y agoI agree, we should show more examples. AQL was indeed inspired by XQuery. We made some user acceptant tests at the very start and used a version which was using keywords from SQL and a more descriptive approach with keywords from programming languages. At least our test users were mostly confused by a similar SQL-syntax but slightly different SQL sematic. We talked to the JSONiq guys. They had a look as XQuery and AQL and made a similar decision.
- phpnode 12y agohttps://www.arangodb.com/key-features#aql https://www.arangodb.com/key-features#aql does a relatively good job explaining it. The examples are all fairly simple, in a real world app you have much more complicated queries and it's here where arango really shines imho. With SQL it's very easy to write inefficient queries by accident, whereas AQL is a lot more explicit.
- jmakeig 12y agoLooks like a FLWOR statement in XQuery.