▲ | sgarland 2 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
> getting hierarchical data based on parent_id So, an adjacency list (probably, though there are many alternatives, which are usually better). That’s not complex, that’s a self-join. > trigram functions That’s an indexing decision, not a query. It’s also usually a waste: if you’re doing something like looking up a user by email or name, and you don’t want case sensitivity to wreck your plan, then use a case-insensitive collation for that column. > I agree knowing SQL is still useful, but more for double checking the queries from LLMs “I agree knowing Python / TypeScript / Golang is still useful, but more for double checking the queries from LLMs.” This sounds utterly absurd, because it is. Why SQL is seen as a nice-to-have instead of its reality - the beating heart of every company - is beyond me. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | brulard a day ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Your Python / TypeScript etc. argument is a strawman, thats why it sounds absurd. Your arguments would hold better if an average person was good and very quick at learning and memoizing complex new things. I don't know if you work with people like that, but that's definitely not the norm. Even developers know little SQL unless it's their specific focus. In the original comment you said: > I guarantee you, anyone who knows any other language could learn enough SQL to do 99% of what they wanted in a couple of hours. Give it a day of intensive study, and you’d know the rest. It’s just not that complicated. Well your "guarantee" does not hold up. Where I live, every college level developer went through multiple semesters of database courses and yet I don't see these people proficient in SQL. In couple hours? 99% of what they need? Absurd | |||||||||||||||||
|