Re:Jepsen: Dgraph 1.1.1
by mrjn on Friday May 01, 2020 @04:22PM
(#23046112)
Hmm... That's probably not the testimonial I was hoping to get from a Dgraph user.
Though, I can see part of your pain is because of the custom query language, GraphQL+-. We now offer standard official GraphQL compliance as well, which tackles a lot of these issues you ran into.
1 and 2. GraphQL is becoming very common, so plenty of resources.
3. GraphQL has many amazing editors.
4. GraphQL allows for lack of referential integrity by setting certain fields in the object as non-nullable, which can remove those objects from the results and so on -- which is frankly, the thesis we have around a distributed graph database, sharded by predicates (not nodes).
5. arrr... sad.
6. GraphQL has many client libraries and so on.
Hope we could change your opinion by switching you to standard GraphQL -- particularly, if you don't need the advanced features provided by plus-minus.
Re:Jepsen: Dgraph 1.1.1
by jcims on Friday May 01, 2020 @05:36PM
(#23046768)
TBH I think most of those complaints are true of the graph database ecosystem in general. I haven't used Dgraph but I echo the same concerns from my experience.
Though, I can see part of your pain is because of the custom query language, GraphQL+-. We now offer standard official GraphQL compliance as well, which tackles a lot of these issues you ran into.
1 and 2. GraphQL is becoming very common, so plenty of resources.
3. GraphQL has many amazing editors.
4. GraphQL allows for lack of referential integrity by setting certain fields in the object as non-nullable, which can remove those objects from the results and so on -- which is frankly, the thesis we have around a distributed graph database, sharded by predicates (not nodes).
5. arrr... sad.
6. GraphQL has many client libraries and so on.
Hope we could change your opinion by switching you to standard GraphQL -- particularly, if you don't need the advanced features provided by plus-minus.