18 ms·
In addition to the sibling comment, you might also consider simply not using the APIs or SQL queries to begin with. Many people have entire careers without touc
by GrowingSideways 8mo ago
In addition to the sibling comment, you might also consider simply not using the APIs or SQL queries to begin with. Many people have entire careers without touching either.
- moron4hire 8mo agoWhy would I ever consider doing that?
- GrowingSideways 8mo agoThat's up to you. Why ask me?
- ogogmad 8mo agoI think you're failing to get that using a filesystem API to work with things that aren't naturally anything like filesystems might get perverse. And standard filesystems are a pretty unnatural way to lay out information anyway, given that they force everything into a tree structure.
- moron4hire 8mo agoThis is what I was trying to get at. A lot of the data I deal with is directed, cyclic graphs. Actually, I personally think most data sets we care about are actually directed graphs of some kind, but we've gotten so used to thinking of them as trees that we force the metaphor too far. I mean, file systems are an excellent example of a thing we actually want to be a graph but we've forced into being a tree. Because otherwise why would we have ever invented symlinks?
- GrowingSideways 8mo agoThere's a bunch of literature about accessing graphs through tree lenses. I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for. SQL certainly forces you to look at graphs as trees. Do you have an specific interface you're trying to access? If you're trying to use a graph database, why mention APIs and SQL?
- GrowingSideways 8mo agoI just assumed they wanted to interface with existing json over http apis rather than write their own code. The sibling of my previous comment addresses that concern.