| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linus has a way with words.Linus has a way with words.Posted Apr 8, 2005 15:27 UTC (Fri) by StevenCole (guest, #3068)Parent article: Linus codes up a patch manager
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, [a well-intentioned kernel hacker] wrote: > > Why not to use sql as backend instead of the tree of directories? Because it sucks? I can come up with millions of ways to slow things down on my own. Please come up with ways to speed things up instead. Linus
(Log in to post comments)
Linus has a way with words. Posted Apr 8, 2005 17:04 UTC (Fri) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] Why not use SQL? Because a content-addressable design means it's easier to use a distributed hash table. Don't download every patch ever--just run a node and pull what you need out of the "cloud".
Linus has a way with words. Posted Apr 11, 2005 7:42 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] For those people who aren't professional database programmers ...
SQL is a query language meant to address relational databases. But the pro relational guys hate SQL with a vengeance because it ISN'T relational.
And for those people here who remember me, I think relational is crap because, despite all the claims that "it is built on maths", when I read C&D's twelve rules, all I see is a list of requirements to make the database programmer guy's life easier (that's the guy writing the database engine, not the guy writing programs that use the engine).
A quick challenge - take a look at the twelve rules, and see if you can find ONE that could reasonably be taken to be a mathematical axiom, rather than a "constraint of convenience".
Cheers,
Linus has a way with words. Posted Apr 11, 2005 8:59 UTC (Mon) by jdv (subscriber, #712) [Link] > take a look at the twelve rules
Could you post a link?
Linus has a way with words. Posted Apr 11, 2005 14:29 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] http://www.itworld.com/nl/db_mgr/05072001/pf_index.html
(as found by Google :-)
Actually, I think I'd probably classify just *one* as an axiom - all data must have an unambiguous reference.
The rest of it simply defines what makes a relational (as opposed to any other) database. A bit like Euclid's "parallel lines never meet" defines the *sub*set of geometry that is Euclidean, but does not define geometry itself (and, in defining a subset, defines itself as a constraint not an axiom).
Cheers,
|
|
||||||||||||