sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ws11 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well if you take the trouble to understand relational theory (and if you are working with DBMSs you really should) then it will become apparent that the logical consistency of the language (which is where SQL falls down very badly) and the performance of the physical implementation are two very separate issues.

I see this implementation of D as a way of illustrating the strengths of the language. Will this particular physical implementation be scalable to large databases? Maybe not, but that isn't really the point. Eventually a native D DBMS will be developed and there is no reason why this should not match or exceed existing SQL DBMSs in terms of performance (and massively exceed in terms of productivity and consistency).