Do you agree that SQL needs massive improvement?
To find out whether others share my belief that SQL needs massive improvement, I’ve added a poll to my post Why SQL Loses and NoSQL Wins. You can vote below or on the original post; it’s the same poll, so it doesn’t matter where you vote. At the time of writing, it’s a neck-and-neck race between Disagree and Agree.
Here’s a summary of my original post:
The First Reason Why SQL Loses: SQL Can’t Really be Optimized: SQL has so many design flaws that it is not as amenable to machine optimization as a properly designed “data base sublanguage” could be. A number of good reading links are provided in the original post.
The Second Reason Why SQL Loses: SQL is Used Inappropriately: SQL is best suited for business data processing (BDP) and badly suited for messaging applications such as Oracle Streams. Using the SQL interface for row-by-row processing of large amounts of data makes the applications run “slow by slow.”
The Solution: Jump on the NoSQL Bandwagon: Leverage the momentum of the NoSQL movement to create a SQL replacement that is well-suited to machine optimization and allows software developers to control the execution plan if they wish to do so. An appropriate name for this replacement might well be “NoSQL.” SQL will not die easily but perhaps, just perhaps, some upstart little company will challenge the old guard and reinvigorate relational technology.
P.S. I have a lot of opinions but am willing to change them when confronted with fresh facts. As the American philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson said in his essay on self-reliance: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. Speak what you think now in hard words, and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today.”
As Mogens Norgaard famously said at the end of one of his essays: “Now prove me wrong.”