Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:39:49 -0700
From: Guyren Howe <guyren@gmail.com>
To: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Message-ID: <7e56cc47-ae9c-43ee-9984-77df3a485d2e@Spark>
Subject: Rationale for aversion to the central database?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5aca8c33_140e0f76_e57"
Precedence: bulk

--5aca8c33_140e0f76_e57
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I am a Rails developer at a medium-large size company. I=E2=80=99ve mostl=
y worked at smaller companies. I=E2=80=99ve some exposure to other web de=
velopment communities.

When it comes to databases, I have universally encountered the attitude t=
hat one should treat the database as a dumb data bucket. There is a *very=
* strong aversion to putting much of any business logic in the database. =
I encounter substantial aversion to have multiple applications access one=
 database, or even the reverse: all abstraction should be at the applicat=
ion layer.

My best theory is that these communities developed at a time when Windows=
 was more dominant, and just generally it was *significantly* easier to u=
se MySQL than Postgres for many, particularly new, developers. And it is =
pretty reasonable to adopt an aversion to sophisticated use of the databa=
se in that case.

This attitude has just continued to today, even as many of them have swit=
ched to Postgres.

This is only a hypothesis. I am now officially researching the issue. I w=
ould be grateful for any wisdom from this community.


Aside: it is rare to find a situation in life or anywhere where one widel=
y adopted thing is worse in *every way* than another thing, but this cert=
ainly was and largely still continues to be the case when one compares My=
SQL and Postgres. So why do folks continue to use MySQL=3F I find this my=
stifying.

--5aca8c33_140e0f76_e57
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<html xmlns=3D=22http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml=22>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div name=3D=22messageBodySection=22>I am a Rails developer at a medium-l=
arge size company. I=E2=80=99ve mostly worked at smaller companies. I=E2=80=
=99ve some exposure to other web development communities.<br />
<br />
When it comes to databases, I have universally encountered the attitude t=
hat one should treat the database as a dumb data bucket. There is a *very=
* strong aversion to putting much of any business logic in the database. =
I encounter substantial aversion to have multiple applications access one=
 database, or even the reverse: all abstraction should be at the applicat=
ion layer.<br />
<br />
My best theory is that these communities developed at a time when Windows=
 was more dominant, and just generally it was *significantly* easier to u=
se MySQL than Postgres for many, particularly new, developers. And it is =
pretty reasonable to adopt an aversion to sophisticated use of the databa=
se in that case.<br />
<br />
This attitude has just continued to today, even as many of them have swit=
ched to Postgres.<br />
<br />
This is only a hypothesis. I am now officially researching the issue. I w=
ould be grateful for any wisdom from this community.<br />
<br />
<br />
Aside: it is rare to find a situation in life or anywhere where one widel=
y adopted thing is worse in *every way* than another thing, but this cert=
ainly was and largely still continues to be the case when one compares My=
SQL and Postgres. So why do folks continue to use MySQL=3F I find this my=
stifying.</div>
</body>
</html>

--5aca8c33_140e0f76_e57--