Our Journey to PostgreSQL 12
Am I the only one who thinks it's bizarre that a structured query language defines so much of how we choose to architect and operate our systems?<p>Think about it for a sec: SQL is literally just a language to query and manipulate data. There's no reason that schema changes and data changes have to happen only through the one language, and only through one interface on one piece of software.<p>For whatever reason, this has just been how the most popular products have done it, and they largely just never changed their designs in 40 years. I like the language, and the general organization of the data is handy. But everything else about it is archaic.<p>Why fumble around with synchronization? 99% of the data in big datasets doesn't change. This doesn't even have to be "log-based", we just need to be able to ship the old, stable data and treat it almost like "cold storage".<p>Why is there a single point of entry into the data? You have to use the one database cluster to access the one database and the one set of tables. Why can't we expose that same data in multiple ways, using multiple pieces of software, on multiple endpoints?<p>Other protocols and languages have ways of dealing with these kinds of things. LDAP can refer you to a different endpoint to process what you need. Web servers can store, process, and retrieve the same content across many different endpoints in a variety of ways. Lots of technology exists that can easily replicate, snapshot, version-control, etc arbitrary pieces of data and expose them to any application using standard interfaces.<p>Why haven't we created a database yet which works more like the Unix operating system?