you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Fashion really does go in cycles.

This here.

When I got into programming I figured it would be mostly linear technological progression. Every once in a while something new gets invented that's better than the last iteration, so we discard the last option (except for legacy stuff) and everyone moves to the better thing.

But since then everything that was cool back then became uncool and cool again at least once.

I like the SQL/No-SQL cycle. SQL is powerful, but it's also slow and clunky and if you do it badly it gets really slow. So we invented No-SQL DBs. They are fast, lightweight, but also barebones and limited. So we add functionality here and there, and before we know it we have another variant of SQL with a different syntax. So we head back to use real SQL. But then we realize it's slow and clunky and if you do it badly it gets really slow. So we invent a new No-SQL DB and the cycle continues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    That's pretty much my point. Actual Nosql does have use cases, but more often than not it was used for hype reasons. "Everyone uses Nosql, let's not become legacy and hop on the Nosql train!"

    Document DBs came out of Nosql, and are pretty much the same as SQL for most use cases, just with their own funky syntax.

    And then again there are the use cases where people use SQL without relations, basically as a Nosql DB. Just do ORM for everything, do the database stuff in memory in Java and just use SQL to dump crap into.

  • source
  • parent