mcavic - 6:32 pm on Dec 12, 2006 (gmt 0)
SQL is not and cannot be "fast". It is inherently slow, compared to any kind of competant hand-rolled database/algorithm design
I agree that SQL has a lot of overhead. But if your hand-rolled design doesn't allow you to add a simple feature, and mine does, but both perform well in production, which is better? There's nothing wrong with overhead if you're getting something in return.
who ARE working on EXTREMELY large databases -- orders of magnitude larger than MySQL can touch
So how large? I'm working with a U.S. phone directory in a MySQL table with 105 million rows that queries in 0.2 to 0.4 seconds. It's a pain to build and reindex, but then, it's a lot of data.
computer science students will know the famous proverb
I graduated in computer science in 2000, in a degree program that emphasized ANSI C, Unix, and PC hardware. But the proverb tells me as much as "there's never been a car invented that would avoid crashing when you point it at a brick wall and floor it."
I can easily write something
If I had the time, I'd offer to prove it to you. It would be educational for one of us. Which one, I wouldn't stake my life on. :)