[CreRecombinase]

I spend most of my time in the parallel universe that is scientific computing/HPC. In this alternate reality SQL (not to mention databases) never really took off. Instead of scalable, performant databases, we have only the parallel filesystem. I'm convinced the reason contemporary scientific computing don't involve much SQL is sociological/path-dependency, but there are also very good technical reasons. Optimizing software in scientific computing involves two steps: 1) Think hard about your problem until you can frame it as one or more matrix multiplications 2) Plug that into a numerical linear algebra library The SQL abstraction (in my experience) takes you very much in the opposite direction.

[wpietri]

For sure. Anything done in SQL is running on top of a million lines or more of extremely complicated non-SQL code. If that works for a given use case, great, but if not, optimizing can get very challenging. I'd much rather deal with something closer to the metal.