News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was invented in the '70s. Parent comment

Re:The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was inven... by yawboakye on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @04:50PM (#39609569)
graph databases win on actual data layouts in disk blocks. trying to make relational databases ‘understand’ graphs really happens only at the query language layer. the data on disk remains optimized for relational queries. i’m not aware of any relational database shipping a storage engine optimized for graphs. if you know any, please share. thanks :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was inven... by refset on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @05:12PM (#39609800)
There's more potential applicability/overlap for columnar relational engines (vs. row stores) - this 2023 paper offers some useful background: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.08702.pdf
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was inven... by wrs on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @05:09PM (#39609771)
On the other hand, nearly everybody’s data fits in RAM nowadays, and NVMe is so fast the disk layout constraints have changed a lot. So maybe now’s a good time to rethink anyway.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was inven... by refset on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @05:14PM (#39609810)
But only if the data is valuable enough to cover the (much) higher costs that come with those assumptions.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The "missing" graph datatype already exists. It was inven... by cmrdporcupine on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @06:19PM (#39610343)
https://relational.ai/product
[ Parent | on HN ]