What is the most redpilled database software to use?
What is the most redpilled database software to use?
Other urls found in this thread:
archive.fo
mariadb.org
des.sourceforge.net
twitter.com
mysql
sqlite
A flat file
anything with a schema
I thought mysql went corporate or not quite FOSS or something.
Google drive
The right NoSQL database for the job.
Saving everything on Word 2003 files, inside multiple 1GiB pen-drives
correct. mariadb is better
MySQL got bought out by Oracle a couple years ago, and as we all know, Oracle ruins everything they touch so now everyone uses the fork MariaDB as a direct replacement for MySQL.
mariadb.org
I got one right!
PostgreSQL
Sqlite
a single JSON file
This.
anyone using the term redpilled will not get a useful answer
Oracle and MSSQL if you want to work. Anything else if you are some loser neckbeard fucking an anime pillow in the basement.
writing your own database program in C using file I/O and linked lists, adding arguments to add, print and remove members.
flat file and unix tools
datomic
sqlite
Iexec in about 3 years
PostgreSQL.
Datalog des.sourceforge.net
pajeet shit
even worse
OP, the patrician choice is postgre for free, or Oracle if you're a billionaire.
foxpro
Oracle because all jobs which aren't hippie indie startup shit require it. Unemployed fags on here won't tell you that.
Microsoft Access
>even worse
Almost everything worth noting now runs NoSQL databases because they're the right tools for the task.
SQL is a thing for fat bindings with lots of conversions and weak programming language compatibility (it after all does the pretty retarded SQL language and its data types, not what you program with).
>doesnt scale properly
Textfile
>because they're the right Tools for the task.
Nope. A lot of the time, it's retards who can't into relational databases.
MongoDB, obviously
only use csv files, user. don't fall for the database meme.
Almost every time SQL databases are only for people who can't into NoSQL databases.
NoSQL is a zoo of different DB types for different tasks.
SQL is the "one size actually doesn't fit most problems and is also not really what your programming language would naturally use" - thing.
But if you want to abuse this and just use one DB with idiot admins, often Cassandra will be a better choice anyhow.
Trips of truth
Why are people recommendung SQLite?
It's good for small projects but is shit cause it's file based.
.txt and .csv
Writing your own in assembly.
/dev/null
oracle db stack. If you have the 40k for the license.
This, they even have hardware acceleration for SQL. And their latest SPARC CPUs are fucking lit.
MariaDB in corporations worldwide.
FireBird.
> something something nazis,
> something something joos
> redpilled
back to you biotrash
how can anybody be so retarded to consider the flaming pile of garbage that's mysql to be good for anything else than wordpress bullshit?
this_is_bait.tiff
> sqlite
to store some small local data data, maybe. There's a reason it has `lite` in its name
absolutely_proprietary.flif
>datomic
give it a couple of years
datomic is an implementation of datalog. Still, I find it kind of slow
overengineering aka how to create a shitton of technical debt right from the start - the movie. The next thing you know is 700k LOC of frontend begging for a refactoring after less than 2 years because the hottest library of the moment is not the hottest anymore
> Oracle
because the hype was high 20 years ago and everybody bought a licence and now the cost of switching away from it is too high
the only possible right answer here. If only OP had asked a good question
localdb
[spoiler]:^)[/spoiler]
None. Databases were a mistake.
It's the fastest, but hard to manage, when it used by a bunch of users and their dog.
At work we use mssql, but it's a buggy POS.
>single core processing
Urbit
Unironically pic related.
An array in RAM.
> the only possible right answer here
Postgres can't do master-master easily.
I use this for my side projects desu
if you don't use postgreSQL you're a little baby bird brain
CockroachDB
>postgres wire protocol compatible
>real SQL
>distribution build in, not tacked on later
>meme name
what's wrong with BDR?
I never used it in production - just toyed around a little bit - but it looked kinda valid to me. Slightly slow on writes though, but lots of gain with the reads instead
> what's wrong with BDR?
As far as I remember, logical solutions on Postgres cannot add new tables into the replica automatically, the list of replicated objects should be rebuilt every time when something new is added into a database.
SQL Server is easily the best database system I've used. It's cheap as hell now, too. This is coming from someone with experience in Oracle, MySQL, MariaDB, DB2, and a few NoSQL flavors, namely Mongo.
Why isnt anyone using Elasticsearch? It combined with Kibana is very practical.
Berkeley DB
>cheap as hell now
this is how I know you haven't
usecase too narrow
Never noticed this one. Gotta check it out better if my shitty company ever grows enough to actually need BDR. Still scales better than oracle tho
I'm referring to hosting SQL databases in Azure. It's extremely cheap.
yeah, tell that to any >1k company with a pointy-haired boss that religiously believes in self-hosting as the ultimate assurance of reliability...
t. ex employee of one
Well, I can't really speak for situations like that. At that point, the price is the fault of the decision maker, not the availability of services.
> Gotta check it out better if my shitty company ever grows enough to actually need BDR
Maybe it's easier to offload all write operations on a master server and serve read operations from WAL slaves?
> overengineering aka how to create a shitton of technical debt right from the start - the movie.
No, you just program normally against it.
Making SQL work is overengineering galore, and the only escape is that part of it is outsourced to the 20 addon third party things that MAYBE make persistence, replication, backup, ORM, regular access (3 frameworks because the team can't agree which is coolest today) and the sysadmin's job work. But you still create a huge compatibility wall to be able to use it with 2-3 applications and make it work without complete bottlenecks or no backups or whatever anyhow.
Why? How does it compare MySQL and Postgres?
TiDB, though.
notecards with holes punched for data points with sticks to sort. encrypt. triplicate. geographically distribute. restrict physical access. bunker. that's redpill, bitches.