From: | Guyren Howe <guyren(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proper relational database? |
Date: | 2016-04-22 19:54:15 |
Message-ID: | B3CD42AA-E126-487A-8719-C2450D3CE5C4@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
The SQL language is terrible but we can live with it.
But the answer to "Are there any relational data stores that offer eventual consistency, easy distribution, schema-on-demand or any such things a large modern application can use?" appears to be no. And that's just awful.
> On Apr 22, 2016, at 12:40 , David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Raymond Brinzer <ray(dot)brinzer(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:ray(dot)brinzer(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
> So, let's just flat-out ask.
>
> Dear Important People: would the PostgreSQL project consider
> supporting other query languages? Or creating a plug-in mechanism for
> them, so that alternative interface languages could be added without
> changing the base code?
>
> If by important you mean possessing a commit-bit then I don't count...but for me, such a project would have to gain significant adoption as a fork of the PostgreSQL code base before it would ever be considered for take-over by the mainline project.
>
> David J.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-04-22 20:16:13 | Re: Proper relational database? |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-04-22 19:40:27 | Re: Proper relational database? |