5 ms·
SQL is a query language and, frankly, doesn't need to be tied to an RDBMS. Look at SimpleDB and now CouchDB. However, with new k/v stores and other database mo
by pierrefar 17y ago
SQL is a query language and, frankly, doesn't need to be tied to an RDBMS. Look at SimpleDB and now CouchDB.
However, with new k/v stores and other database models, I don't see why we need to mangle SQL to work with every single type of data model. If it can be mapped, great. Otherwise, let each database build a query language to truly exploit its power.
- shpxnvz 17y agoNote, however, that the SimpleDB 'select' syntax is SQL-like and not actually SQL. The danger here is a proliferation of syntactically similar but semantically different query languages, and mass confusion as developers attempt to switch between data storage providers.
- tesseract 17y agoHow about using a real SQL engine, then? http://www.sqlite.org/vtab.html http://www.sqlite.org/vtab.html among other possibilities.
- fnid 17y agoSQL is the rosetta stone between many data storage engines. If NoSQL is going to succeed, I would argue that they will need to standardize their query languages. There countless paradigms that prove my point. The web won out over the desktop. Relational won out over flat files. XML over other formats. If the paradigm of NoSQL will succeed, customers will want some belief that they can ultimately escape the clutches of a particular vendor's product.