| > I can't remember ever finding it more difficult or backwards than anything else I use." This is the major problem. SQL looks like is not "difficult". You don't see (as a user) all their MASSIVE, HUGE, problems. That is why: - People barely do more than basic SQL - People can't imagine SQL can be used for more than that, which leads to: - Doing a lot of hacky, complex, unnecessary stuff on app code (despite the RDBMS being capable of it) - Trying to layer something "better" in the forms of ORM - Refusing to use advanced stuff like views, stored procedures, custom types, and the like - Using of using advanced stuff like views, stored procedures, custom types, and the like, but wrongly - Thinking that SQL means RDBMS - So when the RDBMS fails, it is because the RDBMS is inferior. But in fact, is SQL that have failed (you bet the internals of the RDBMS are far more powerful than any NoSql engine, unfortunately, they are buried forever because SQL is a bad programming interface for the true potential of the engine!) - So dropping SQL/RDBMS for something better, like JS (seriously?) - And they are happier with their "cloud scale" NoSQL that rarely performs better, needs major, massive hacks for queries, or reimplements, poorly, ACID again, is more prone to data issues, etc. And this is not even starting. If you think "is bad to make a full app, all their code, in relational model" that is how much brain damage SQL has caused. --- I can count with my fingers the number of semi-proper DBs/SQL usage on my niche (ERPs) and that is mostly mine! (For example: I use dates for dates, not strings, like many of my peers!) and that is taking into account that I actually learned what the heck is that "relational" thingy after +20 years of professional use. Go figure! P.D: And then go to my code and see "what the heck, I could have done this in some few lines of SQL" and "what the heck, if only SQL were well designed I could do this dozen lines of SQL in 3!" |