Greg Jarmiolowski

A member of the Philip Greenspun's Homepage community since July 12, 2010

If you were to log in, you'd be able to get more information on your fellow community member.

July 12, 2010, on Web Operations:
It seems to me that frustration with MySQL is a part of this move towards NoSQL data stores. Adding to this is the popularity of the Ruby on Rails framework which happily abstracts the data store and applies its own relation algebra to help developers to completely ignore "relational" (and transactions too). I once attended a Rails talk where the speaker said they had to switch to CouchDB because the database couldn't handle and was not designed for the high frequency queries his application was executing. I imagined this was in part because the application code needed to use the data dictionary to figure out what the data store looked like - on every call. It's sort of implied by the name of the DB object library: "Active Record". One thing I can say about a thick database approach is that your application will weather all the GUI language fads. Maybe that should be in a chapter about on going maintenance. Thanks for the review. I now know what not to buy.